Current Events and the Psychology of Politics
Loading

Featured Posts        



categories        



Links        



archives        



meta        






U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), criticizing the economic stimulus plan on KTLK radio in the Twin Cities with her trademark gloom-and-doom histrionics, foresees a “national rationing board,” claims “your doctor will no longer be able to make your health care decisions with you,” and catastrophizes that “we’re running out of rich people in this country.”

CNN Newsroom

CNN logo NEWSROOM
Wall Street vs. Main Street
Aired February 20, 2009 — 15:00 ET


Rick Sanchez, CNN anchor

RICK SANCHEZ: Now, Michele Bachmann, if you haven’t heard of her, she’s a congresswoman from the state of Minnesota — back into this argument about rich and poor in this country, a comment that she made about this while she was being interviewed the other day on a radio station. Now, mind you, she is on the Financial Services Committee. She’s talked about patriotism before. This time, she goes on a radio show. She criticizes the stimulus plan. Not quite sure, though, what she is talking about in a couple of instances, and then separates Americans according to rich and poor.

Here it is from KTLK.


(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP, KTLK)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, R-MINNESOTA: If you think, ACORN, this is a group that is under federal indictment for voter fraud.

CHRIS BAKER, KTLK: Unbelievable.

BACHMANN: ACORN, they have received a total of $53 million in direct federal grants since 1994. You know how much they’re getting under this bill?

BAKER: Like $4 billion, I have heard.

BACHMANN: Five billion dollars […] for ACORN. Now, that’s a plus-up. I don’t see ACORN sacrificing in economic hard times. So, now we will have a national rationing board? And your doctor will no longer be able to make your health care decisions with you. I don’t know where they’re going to go to get all this money, because we’re running out of rich people in this country.

BAKER: Yes, we are. We are running out of rich people.

BACHMANN: Under Obama, big evil is now anyone with a joint income of $100,000 or more.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: “We’re running out of rich people.”

Patricia Murphy is good enough to join us now. She is the editor of CitizenJanePolitics.com.

Let’s go through these one at a time. The first thing she said is about ACORN. […]

“ACORN,” she says, “is a group under federal indictment for voter fraud.” And then she says, “You know how much they’re getting under this bill? Five billion dollars.”

Murph, is ACORN mentioned anywhere in the stimulus package?

PATRICIA MURPHY, EDITOR, CITIZENJANEPOLITICS.COM: ACORN is not mentioned in the stimulus package.

There are a couple of things we can talk about here. ACORN is not under indictment. They are federal investigation. And then what she’s talking about, this money, the $5 billion, that is something that’s money for neighborhood stabilization.

What that means is that groups can go in, buy distressed homes or abandoned homes and fix them up, so that the neighborhood doesn’t deteriorate.

SANCHEZ: Any group?

MURPHY: Well, states, cities, towns are the usually ones who used to get that. Now Congress has said that nonprofits can apply for that money. ACORN is a nonprofit and they certainly will apply for that money. But they are not getting all of it. They probably will get some of it, though.

SANCHEZ: Yes, just like anybody else might be able to get some of it.

But to blatantly say ACORN is getting $5 billion, if we were to ask you as a reporter to fact-check that, you would say true or false?

MURPHY: False.

SANCHEZ: Thank you.

Let’s check this one now. “So, now we will have a national rationing board, and your doctor will no longer be able to make your health care decisions with you.” She said that. She was on the record. Would you fact-check that for us?

MURPHY: What she’s talking about here — this is a little complicated, but it is a process that the federal government does called comparative effectiveness research.

That’s when the government collects data on medical procedures and medical devices to see which ones are most effective. Congress tripled the funding for that research in the stimulus bill.

What that has done, though, has raised conservatives’ concerns that this is a precursor to nationalization of health care. Once you have the federal government poking around in data, they say that that will lead to the government deciding what you can and cannot have your doctor do.

That’s not true, but it could lead to the decisions about whether the government will and won’t reimburse.

SANCHEZ: It could. But to say your doctor will no longer be able to make your health care decisions with you, stretch?

MURPHY: False. False.

SANCHEZ: OK.

MURPHY: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Two for two.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Look at this one. This is interesting.

“I don’t know where they’re going to get all this money, because we’re running out of rich people in this country.”

You know, this sounds very Marie Antoinette-ish to me. And I was always taught — learned from a friend a long time ago — you don’t go around talking about rich people, because one guy’s rich is another guy’s poor. It’s a relative term.

Should any politician, no less a congressman or congresswoman who is on a Financial Services Committee, be making statements like this? And is it good for either party? She happens to be a Republican. But, if she were a Democrat, is that a good strategy for any party?

MURPHY: Well, the problem with what she’s talking about, the strategy behind it is not accurate.

What she’s talking about when she talks about Barack Obama, the big evil, $100,000 combined, what she’s talking about is Obama’s plans to increase taxes or to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the highest-income earners, $250,000. But it’s just not accurate what she’s saying.

And when you parse all of these statements, politics is really in the eye of the beholder. And if you’re not — if you don’t trust who’s putting in the policy, if you don’t trust what they’re going to do, that’s basically what she’s saying. But it’s not accurate.

SANCHEZ: But you can’t make it up.

MURPHY: You can’t make it up.

SANCHEZ: Thanks, Murph. We always appreciate having you on.

MURPHY: Thanks.

——

File: “I may not always get my words right”

Related reports

CNN’s Rick Sanchez fact-checks Bachmann

Storm follows stimulus comments by Bachmann

Michele Bachmann: “We’re running out of rich people in this country”

Bachmann Watch: Bachmann “sounds very Marie Antoinette-ish”





7 Responses to “Bachmann ‘Marie Antoinette-ish’”
  1. Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Bachmann Watch Says:

    […] Bachmann’s false claim that the Obama administration’s economic recovery package includes $5 billion for ACORN […]

  2. Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Honors for Michele Bachmann Says:

    […] Bachmann ‘Marie Antoinette-ish’ (Feb. 22, 2009) […]

  3. Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Iran Ramps Up Nuclear Program Says:

    […] Bachmann ‘Marie Antoinette-ish’ […]

  4. Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Bachmann’s March of Folly Says:

    […] Bachmann ‘Marie Antoinette-ish’ (Feb. 22, 2009) […]

  5. Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Bachmann Plays Victim … Again Says:

    […] Bachmann ‘Marie Antoinette-ish’ (February 22, 2009) […]

  6. Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Bachmann Headlines British Press Says:

    […] Bachmann ‘Marie Antoinette-ish’ (Feb. 22, 2009) […]

  7. Immelman for Congress » Blog Archive » Gadhafi Steers Libya to Civil War Says:

    […] Bachmann ‘Marie Antoinette-ish’ […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.