Myers says Bachmann’s frequent errors, misstatements and distortions aren’t just bad for civic discourse — they’re bad for women.
“Though politically expedient, incorrect comments cast a shadow on your person and by unfortunate proxy, both your supporters and detractors alike often generalize this shadow to women as a whole,” Myers writes.
Here’s Myers’ letter to the notorious Representative from Minnesota:
Dear Representative Bachmann,
My name is Amy Myers. I am a Cherry Hill, New Jersey sophomore attending Cherry Hill High School East. As a typical high school student, I have found quite a few of your statements regarding The Constitution of the United States, the quality of public school education and general U.S. civics matters to be factually incorrect, inaccurately applied or grossly distorted. The frequency and scope of these comments prompted me to write this letter.
Though I am not in your home district, or even your home state, you are a United States Representative of some prominence who is subject to national media coverage. News outlets and websites across this country profile your causes and viewpoints on a regular basis. As one of a handful of women in Congress, you hold a distinct privilege and responsibility to better represent your gender nationally. The statements you make help to serve an injustice to not only the position of Congresswoman, but women everywhere. Though politically expedient, incorrect comments cast a shadow on your person and by unfortunate proxy, both your supporters and detractors alike often generalize this shadow to women as a whole.
Rep. Bachmann, the frequent inability you have shown to accurately and factually present even the most basic information about the United States led me to submit the follow challenge, pitting my public education against your advanced legal education:
I, Amy Myers, do hereby challenge Representative Michele Bachmann to a Public Forum Debate and/or Fact Test on The Constitution of the United States, United States History and United States Civics.
Hopefully, we will be able to meet for such an event, as it would prove to be enlightening.
Sincerely yours,
Amy Myers
BACHMANN’S LATEST LIE:
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
There’s a Republican debate going on right now sans Mittens Romney. There’s a lot of live blogs going on out there. I’m putting this thread up but telling you that I really have no desire to watch a train wreck. It’s being held in Greenville, South Carolina.
GREENVILLE, S.C. — The 2012 election season begins Thursday in earnest with the Republican Party’s first presidential primary debate here at 9 p.m. ET.
But only five GOP hopefuls are taking part, as some hang back and wait to fully engage (like former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman) while others have yet to commit to a bid for the Oval Office (see former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and current Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels).
Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty is the biggest name taking part at Peace Center for the Performing Arts, though Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) certainly has the most enthusiastic fanbase. Others hitting the stage include former Sen. Rick Santorum (Pa.), former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, and former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain.
and if you really want to watch it, it’s on FOX surprise, surprise, surprise!!! NOT!!!
All of the hopefuls but Herman Cain would release OBL’s photo. (whew, they GOT the big one out of the way) and now they’re all singing the praises of ‘enhanced interrogation’.
Please, deliver us from EVIL!!!
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
I talked to Bostonboomer last night about the time John King–sober this time–was on the air. Piers Morgan is a cup of tea that I don’t want to know exists, but I did go back to look for a pattern during the Anderson Cooper show. I even checked out Fox News a bit. There it was. The Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld torture policy apologist tour. It was inevitable that a few Bushies would show up to offer the ‘balance’ to the Osama story. I’m not sure if Dubya wants to be able to visit the South of France without fear of being arrested for crimes against humanity or it’s just a bunch of guilty consciences trying to find equilibrium, I just see the meme and it’s appalling.
The Bushies have jumped on the Bin Laden courier narrative as a way to justify their treatment of Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed and other detainees from the War on Terror. I must’ve not been the only one that saw this unfolding because today’s RealClearPolitics has a pretty good set of videos up with both the meme mongers–like NY’s Congressional Ninny Peter King— and the ones that say this isn’t so. I’d say John Brennan’s word on the matter is a pretty authoritative one. SOS Clinton speaks on this too. Brennan was on Morning Joe this morning try to kill the meme among other things.
Like so many memes that persist in politics, this one started on the Internet. The morning after President Obama announced that Osama bin Laden had been killed in Pakistan, conservatives started crowing that credit should be given to President George W. Bush — specifically, for having the foresight and courage to torture the people who provided the initial scraps of intel that ultimately led the CIA to a giant compound just north of Islamabad.
The most prominent of these conservatives was Rep. Steve King (R-IA), who took to Twitter to ask sardonically, “Wonder what President Obama thinks of water boarding now?
About two hours later, the Associated Press published a brief story claiming that the CIA obtained the initial intelligence it needed to find bin Laden from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — the so-called mastermind of 9/11 — and his successor, Abu Faraj al-Libi at CIA black sites in Poland and Romania.
Those secret prisons, which the Obama administration contends to have abandoned, were the facilities where Mohammed and al-Libi were waterboarded. There, the detainees supposedly identified by nom de guerre a courier who would years later be located by American intelligence officials, and lead them to bin Laden’s compound.
“The news is sure to reignite debate over whether the now-closed interrogation and detention program was successful,” the AP wrote. “Former president George W. Bush authorized the CIA to use the harshest interrogation tactics in U.S. history. President Barack Obama closed the prison system.”
There’s just one problem. The key bit of intel wasn’t acquired via torture, according to a more fleshed out version of the same report.
The morning after the day after the ghoulish Booyah Death celebrations just reminds me that there are parts of being an American that really dismay me because there are things about American Society that are just over the top. It’s our inability to separate our modern reality from spaghetti westerns and other Hollywood genres. This entire thing is unfolding like a series of badly written, thinly plotted Hollywood movies. Don’t even get me started on the actors.
I’d like to think that we could take this time to reflect on the last ten years of blowback rather than join a mosh pit of grave dancers. We now have trillions of dollars sunk in two seemingly endless wars. Many Americans and others have died as a result. This adds to the already too high death toll of the Cole and the World Trade Centers. We got a second Bush term because of all this. We have made flying commercial airlines a complete exercise in fascist humiliation right down to bullies in uniform doing unspeakable things to the elderly and young. Bin Laden’s death gives us reason to recheck our reactions and values, not create a set of worse ones.
I suppose it’s got to be released eventually, but count me lucky that I’m going to be sitting in my house for awhile and not traveling about or serving anywhere dangerous. This is not me being an Obama apologist either, this is me being a realist. Pope Dark Ages just canonized a barely dead pope who supposedly did miracles. We’ve seen martyr’s funerals turn into all kinds of unpleasant things recently. We can’t even get a bunch of nuts from Kansas to stop harassing people at funerals and one nut in particular to quit grandstanding by burning Qurans. Rational behavior is not exactly a hallmark of religion. We’ve seen the nuttiness from humanity BC forward. It’s not going to stop, unfortunately.
A second question will come from the Wag-the-Dog plot. Will the poll bounce that Obama has gotten from this be enough to get people’s minds away from the myriad of problems that are not solved? Again, I think that depends on the size of those lesser, shallow spaghetti western angels that comprise our society. Torture, wars, Gitmo, and the TSA can only bring on so much false sense of security. I think we’ve learned some of that over the past decade. Hopefully, I’m not just being optimistic. Most of us know that Osama Bin Laden’s death will not get us out of Afghanistan and Iraq any quicker. It will not solve our unemployment problem and it’s not going to stop the finance sector from draining every penny it can out of businesses and households. It certainly is not going to solve our problem with Pakistan or hopefully, define our policy on the nations undergoing the Arab Spring.
You can gleefully dance on a watery grave for only so long before you have to go back to chopping wood, carrying water, and cooking dinner. Eventually, you have to come back from the adrenaline rush and face the problems that are not dead. Osama Bin Laden has been one very small problem recently. It’s nice he’s out of the way, still …
The Corps of Engineers is blowing up a levee on the Mississippi River as we speak. It will flood parts of Missouri. You remember those guys, they are the ones that brought us the Katrina aftermath. Canada just had an election with some astounding results. The UK is considering completely changing the way they vote and achieve majorities. They’re not getting a consensus on governance any more than we’ve been able to find bi-partisanship. What does this mean for democracy? Their parliamentary system is at the root of as many governments as our republic. Governments are being overthrown in a part of the world where we get most of our oil. When will that impact Saudi Arabia? Is Japan’s nuclear reactor any closer to safe? Are you eating Gulf seafood yet? Does it bother you that two ecosystems have been utterly destroyed by the energy industry with a year? What have we learned about these things over the last two days?
Unfortunately, the public forum to work out all these issues is going to be our very corporate, very broken media and the nether reaches of the internet where hopefully some less-captured voices prevail. I think we all have the duty to get beyond the hooplah and search out the facts because these things have a tendency to shape policy as well as conversations. I’m concerned that our two second attention span–which fixates on personalities and symbolic events–will take our eyes away from the real deal. Does it matter if Bin Laden is dead or alive? What problem does that really solve?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
I’m having an interesting day reading all the links out there and discussions on several Ezra Klein blog posts. Some one should’ve noticed Obama’s hero-worship of Reagan during the primaries about three years ago. Some one should’ve read his books that were gleeful about past Republican policy initiatives. But no, we were too busy discussing other things to notice how far to the right Barrack Obama really is.
President Obama, if you look closely at his positions, is a moderate Republican from the early 1990s. And the Republican Party he’s facing has abandoned many of its best ideas in its effort to oppose him.
If you put aside the emergency measures required by the financial crisis, three major policy ideas have dominated American politics in recent years: a health-care plan that uses an individual mandate and tax subsidies to achieve near-universal coverage; a cap-and-trade plan that attempts to raise the prices of environmental pollutants to better account for their costs; and bringing tax rates up from their Bush-era lows as part of a bid to reduce the deficit. In each case, the position that Obama and the Democrats have staked out is the very position that moderate Republicans staked out in the early ’90s — and often, well into the 2000s.
I’ve been saying for years–literally–that the Obama Health Care Plan was more conservative than Nixon’s and basically was grabbed from Lincoln Chaffe’s Heritage Plan in the 1990s which was later called Dolecare and then later morphed into Romneycare. That’s just Klein’s first example. He also provides evidence on cap and trade which was supported by George H.W. Bush and Newt Gingrich when it was applied to ‘acid rain’ instead of ‘global warming’. He then moves to tax policies. Obama’s obvious proclivities to voodoo economics even showed up in the first stimulus which was top heavy with tax cuts and not big enough on job creation measures. Klein doesn’t even touch the increasing military budgets and interventions, the GLBT and women’s rights issues that get bargained away, FISA, Gitmo, etc., etc., etc. …
Here’s Mark Thoma’s take on the Klein piece and a follow-up by Andrew Samick. Samick considers Obama to be a Rockefeller Republican of all things. I’d say Obama’s even more to the right than that because that’s pretty much the side of the Republican party that raised me. Rockefeller Republicans love Planned Parenthood among other things. Warren Buffet is a great example. Hell, Charlton Heston loved Planned Parenthood. I even heard him speak on population control issues in Omaha, Nebraska in the mid 1970s sponsored by–gasp!–Planned Parenthood. The most interesting part is Thoma’s ending question. Why are we moving so far to the right now?
What’s left unexplained is why movements to the right by both parties — and these aren’t marginal moves — haven’t alienated the middle of the road, swing voters that seem to make a difference in elections. I don’t think I have a good answer for why. In the present case, there is some voter remorse — Obama is far more conservative than many thought — but I don’t think that explains the larger trend.
The original Ezra Klein piece is here: ‘Obama revealed: A moderate Republican’. Believe me, the conversation has gone viral with folks likeThe National Review (Be forewarned if you go there, it’s a putrid thread.) on line taking the bait. Booman even twists himself into a world class logic pretzel trying to say this is good news because it means Obama’s policies are “mainstream”. Joseph Romm at The Grist discusses the climate policy even further.
In the climate bill debate of the past two years, Obama and the Democrats embraced Republican ideas in an effort to minimize or avoid the partisanship inherent in other approaches that had been explicitly rejected by Republicans, including a tax and a massive ramp up in clean energy funding, as I’ve argued.
But Klein makes an effective case that it simply didn’t matter how reasonable or centrist or business-friendly a strategy environmentalists and progressive politicians pursued (or might have pursued). The Republicans simply were committed to stopping Obama from appearing bipartisan.
The Dems keeps getting suckered by Republicans the way Charlie Brown keeps getting suckered by Lucy. But the difference is that the GOP’s strategy wasn’t even a secret.
Ah, here’s the deal. Romm ties back to Thoma’s question. Why all this goose stepping to the right? Easy. It was the Republican strategy of say not to everything. They had to go further right to say no. Now, we’re in policy measures that are from John Birch Society land. Finally, the Democratic Congress said no more compromises when Planned Parenthood went on the chopping block. They also decided to get what they could get done before Boehner took over the house. We saw a few last minute Democratic Policies get passed but it was only due to the folks in Congress. Obama just went along because, hell, a win is a win, right?
Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell told The New York Times in March 2010, “It was absolutely critical that everybody be together because if the proponents of the bill were able to say it was bipartisan, it tended to convey to the public that this is O.K., they must have figured it out.” Why? As McConnell blurted out right before the 2010 midterm elections, “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”
Obama kept proposing “conservative” policy at the onset. The Republicans announced they would sabotage it from the get go. This is something we complained about and pointed out here and elseblog for years. Obama’s opening policy moves were always a compromise position for real Democrats. He never was worried about putting policy out there with a real Democratic stamp on it because issues aren’t important to him. This President desperately wanted to pass anything with his name on it that would be called success. I frequently argued he wanted to makes sure there was a Health Plan that went through just to show he could do it when the Clintons couldn’t do it. He threw the Democratic plans over board almost immediately including the wildly popular single payer option. Dumping women’s access to private insurance with access to abortion was his final compromise maneuver to pass the silly thing. He’s thrown policies to the wind that have been basic Democratic Platform staples every chance he’s been in office. The Republicans were never going to act satisfied and were going to keep goosestepping further right. It was their announced strategy. He was more than willing to go right along with them because his proclivities are rightish anyway and he just wants the win.
So, my big question is why didn’t these folks see this coming all along like we did? Then a follow-up, what good does all this discovery now do three years too late?
Of course, if you read the Republican blogs, they’re still screaming Obama’s a socialist and Klein’s a fool. If you hit the partisan Democrats, the pretzel logic maneuvers are as obvious as Booman’s trying to find the sunny side up.
I’ll I can say is we told them so. Follow that up by a we are so f’d.
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
A possible sign of things to come via Empty Wheel and the White House Pool Reporters? Evidently, some of the social justice movements are beginning to protest treatment of Bradley Manning. Will war protesters be next?
Mr. Obama was in the middle of his remarks when a woman in a white suit stood up and said, Mr. President we wrote you a song. POTUS tried to get her to wait until later, but she persisted and the table of 10 broke into a song that pointed out they’d just spent $5,000 donating to his campaign and went on to protest the treatment of Pfc. Bradley Manning.
The woman stayed standing as they sang. Mr. Obama looked to Ms. Pelosi and asked, Nancy did you do this? Ms. Pelosi had a look on her face, as she stared at the singing group, that definitely said she did not.
[snip]
The 10 singers then passed around 8.5×11 signs that said “Free Bradley Manning” or had a photo of him.
Then the woman in the white suit stripped off her jacket to reveal a black T-shirt that said Free Bradley Manning, with an image of him.
“We paid our dues. Where’s our change?” they sang.
USSS and WH staff had moved near the table at this point. The woman was escorted out. Two others left on their own. (The rest stayed and applauded at the end of POTUS’s speech.)
“That was a nice song,” a displeased Mr. Obama said.
“Now where was I?” POTUS asked.
As was indicated by that song, “Over the last 2 and a half years, change turned out to be tougher than we expected,” POTUS said.
Excuses!!!! Excuses!!! It’s too hard! The Republicans made me do it!!! The Axelrove Dawg ate my homework!!!
The activists have a facebook page called savebradley. They also Tweet which is how I got all this information!
Our activist Logan is live tweeting the Obama fundraiser in San Francisco this morning. An entire table just stood up and began singing and holding signs for Bradley Manning. This is what politically engaged America looks like!
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
The Sky Dancing banner headline uses a snippet from a work by artist Tashi Mannox called 'Rainbow Study'. The work is described as a" study of typical Tibetan rainbow clouds, that feature in Thanka painting, temple decoration and silk brocades". dakinikat was immediately drawn to the image when trying to find stylized Tibetan Clouds to represent Sky Dancing. It is probably because Tashi's practice is similar to her own. His updated take on the clouds that fill the collection of traditional thankas is quite special.
You can find his work at his website by clicking on his logo below. He is also a calligraphy artist that uses important vajrayana syllables. We encourage you to visit his on line studio.
Recent Comments