Michelle Bachmann's Head is a Novelty Fishbowl

[TripletDaddy]

I sense frustration here on the part of republicans that realize that there is no candidate that will unseat Obama for his second term.

Oxcoug, what are you expecting from the republican response to the SOTU? How much impact has the response historically had? You seem very bothered that the response will not be unified. I'm wondering why when, practically speaking, it doesn't seem like it will matter much.

[oxcoug]

I sense frustration here on the part of republicans that realize that there is no candidate that will unseat Obama for his second term.

Oxcoug, what are you expecting from the republican response to the SOTU? How much impact has the response historically had? You seem very bothered that the response will not be unified. I'm wondering why when, practically speaking, it doesn't seem like it will matter much.

I'm not really concerned with a unified Republican response: In this instance I find Bachmann's self-promotion problematic because it undercuts a person with a message and the mind capable of communicating it, not a party.

Paul Ryan has done more hard work in outlining ways to reign in public spending than anyone on the scene today. And he's the most cogent/informed thinker in the public debate on fiscal responsibility. He's sharp, young, fast on his feet, listens to Metallica when he's prepping for hearings - but is also a non-ideological technocrat who can speak to people on both sides of the aisle.

In other words - he represents everything that the Republican Party needs right now, and Michelle Bachmann represents everything it doesn't need.

As HotAir notes of her SOTU response: "Either it’ll be redundant by duplicating most of the same points that Ryan makes or, if she says something incendiary that the media ends up slobbering over the next day, it’ll overshadow his speech entirely."

And then there's the probability that there's something petty and personal in the background on this - it was Paul Ryan who gave the decisive endorsement that awarded the Conference Chair in the House Republican caucus to Jeb Hensarling, rather than Bachmann.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/11/0...adership-post/

All of which adds up to Bachmann both being dumb [LA Ute's points not withstanding] and being a bitch [her glassy-eyed smileyness notwithstanding].

[Green Monstah]

Just out of curiousity, how many people here actually listen to partisan responses to SOTU by members of Congress? Granted, I don't watch CNN FoxNews, or MSNBC either. Seems like a lot of energy getting worked up over something that 99% of the population won't care about (and perhaps rightfully so).

[LA Ute]

I'm not really concerned with a unified Republican response: In this instance I find Bachmann's self-promotion problematic because it undercuts a person with a message and the mind capable of communicating it, not a party.

Paul Ryan has done more hard work in outlining ways to reign in public spending than anyone on the scene today. And he's the most cogent/informed thinker in the public debate on fiscal responsibility. He's sharp, young, fast on his feet, listens to Metallica when he's prepping for hearings - but is also a non-ideological technocrat who can speak to people on both sides of the aisle.

In other words - he represents everything that the Republican Party needs right now, and Michelle Bachmann represents everything it doesn't need.

As HotAir notes of her SOTU response: "Either it’ll be redundant by duplicating most of the same points that Ryan makes or, if she says something incendiary that the media ends up slobbering over the next day, it’ll overshadow his speech entirely."

And then there's the probability that there's something petty and personal in the background on this - it was Paul Ryan who gave the decisive endorsement that awarded the Conference Chair in the House Republican caucus to Jeb Hensarling, rather than Bachmann.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/11/0...adership-post/

All of which adds up to Bachmann both being dumb [LA Ute's points not withstanding] and being a bitch [her glassy-eyed smileyness notwithstanding].

Subject to my niggling caveat below about her basic intelligence, I agree.

[TripletDaddy]

Just out of curiousity, how many people here actually listen to partisan responses to SOTU by members of Congress? Granted, I don't watch CNN FoxNews, or MSNBC either. Seems like a lot of energy getting worked up over something that 99% of the population won't care about (and perhaps rightfully so).

This is basically my question. Is this an ideological rant (if so, no worries) or is this legitimate concern that either response will have some sort of quantifiable effect in the polls?

The republican party seems to be fractured between a moderate faction and an ultra conservative group. The real problem here isn't Bachman Teabag Overdrive, but a lack of a legitimate candidate to unseat Obama.

[oxcoug]

Subject to my niggling caveat below about her basic intelligence, I agree.

I accept/approve your niggling caveat... ;-).

Though "judgment" is arguably an aspect of "intelligence."

[oxcoug]

This is basically my question. Is this an ideological rant (if so, no worries) or is this legitimate concern that either response will have some sort of quantifiable effect in the polls?

The republican party seems to be fractured between a moderate faction and an ultra conservative group. The real problem here isn't Bachman Teabag Overdrive, but a lack of a legitimate candidate to unseat Obama.

To your first point - over 50 million people watched last year's SOTU (as noted in the thread above). I've heard it estimated in the past that about a third of the people who watch it, stick around for the response. So maybe 15-20 million people. But that doesn't really capture the whole picture - because the talk and the response are excerpted and echoed for at least 48 hours after on the talk circuit and news programs and are analyzed in op-eds all week. So the real reach of an SOTU and a response extends well beyond the audience watching them live. SOTU responses have had star-making and star-breaking effects in the past - Bobby Jindal crashed hard after his poor delivery last year. Jim Webb's response to Bush's last SOTU put him squarely in sights of everyone wondering who the NEXT Democratic president will be.

And there's nothing "ideological" in my complaint - in fact it's anti-ideological. It's precisely because the Republican Party needs to get off ideology (which Michele Bachmann is obsessed with) and to practical, solution-oriented policy (which Ryan has shown himself to be adept at) that her stupid maneuver annoys me.

[TripletDaddy]

If Bobby jindal and Jim Webb are the best examples of the power of a SOTU response address, I would say stop worrying and enjoy your Sunday. Just my opinion, of course but I think this is much ado about nothing.

[oxcoug]

If Bobby jindal and Jim Webb are the best examples of the power of a SOTU response address, I would say stop worrying and enjoy your Sunday. Just my opinion, of course but I think this is much ado about nothing.

to you and your worry-free Sunday suggestions!

But really - I think you're missing the point. I'm not bothered about the SOTU response as an SOTU response. I'm concerned about the broader discourse on debt and public spending - in the balance of influence, the coalition of people who understand that America faces a looming debt crisis needs to be focused and united, not petty and back-stabbing.

Bachmann is executing a petty, back-stabbing maneuver here.

For the first time in the modern history of the SOTU, an office-holding member of one of the two Parties has presumed to offer a response independent of his/her party and for no effing good reason.

It's important because what Ryan will say is important - knowing Ryan's priorities, he WILL address the sanctioned lies that are pushing us to the brink of a debt crisis - and then Bachmann will stand up with her dumb glassy eyes, mime a bunch of cliches, possibly say something incendiary and almost certainly give the media something to talk about other than the very substantive points Ryan will undoubtedly be making.

This isn't a peevish thing for me, I think it has real implications.

[LA Ute]

to you and your worry-free Sunday suggestions!

But really - I think you're missing the point. I'm not bothered about the SOTU response as an SOTU response. I'm concerned about the broader discourse on debt and public spending - in the balance of influence, the coalition of people who understand that America faces a looming debt crisis needs to be focused and united, not petty and back-stabbing.

Bachmann is executing a petty, back-stabbing maneuver here.

For the first time in the modern history of the SOTU, an office-holding member of one of the two Parties has presumed to offer a response independent of his/her party and for no effing good reason.

It's important because what Ryan will say is important - knowing Ryan's priorities, he WILL address the sanctioned lies that are pushing us to the brink of a debt crisis - and then Bachmann will stand up with her dumb glassy eyes, mime a bunch of cliches, possibly say something incendiary and almost certainly give the media something to talk about other than the very substantive points Ryan will undoubtedly be making.

This isn't a peevish thing for me, I think it has real implications.

I agree. News media love stuff like this: "Divisions among conservatives!!!" Bachmann is smart and knows that, which is why the self-promotion and opportunism are so annoying.

[oxcoug]

Bachmann is smart and knows that, which is why the self-promotion and opportunism are so annoying.

You're going to keep insisting on this aren't you?

Maybe, just maybe, she's not that smart - at least not in the ways that matter here - and that's why she's doing it.

[LA Ute]

You're going to keep insisting on this aren't you?

Maybe, just maybe, she's not that smart - at least not in the ways that matter here - and that's why she's doing it.

I suspect she knows exactly what she is doing. Makes it worse, IMO.

[RobinFinderson]

to you and your worry-free Sunday suggestions!

But really - I think you're missing the point. I'm not bothered about the SOTU response as an SOTU response. I'm concerned about the broader discourse on debt and public spending - in the balance of influence, the coalition of people who understand that America faces a looming debt crisis needs to be focused and united, not petty and back-stabbing.

Bachmann is executing a petty, back-stabbing maneuver here.

For the first time in the modern history of the SOTU, an office-holding member of one of the two Parties has presumed to offer a response independent of his/her party and for no effing good reason.

It's important because what Ryan will say is important - knowing Ryan's priorities, he WILL address the sanctioned lies that are pushing us to the brink of a debt crisis - and then Bachmann will stand up with her dumb glassy eyes, mime a bunch of cliches, possibly say something incendiary and almost certainly give the media something to talk about other than the very substantive points Ryan will undoubtedly be making.

This isn't a peevish thing for me, I think it has real implications.

Hmmm... so I agree that Bachman is a terrible person to deliver such a response because she sure appears to be a stupid person who has no clue what she is talking about, and who appeals to the worst elements of the Tea Party movement.

But the Tea Party movement represents an unprecedented rewriting of the rules of decorum and partisanship, and her gesture fits into the Tea Party modus operandi just fine.

It is very important that the Tea Party movement does not get co-opted by either party. A Tea Bagger can run for office in whatever party is a closest fit to the candidate's political ideas. Identifying as a Tea Bagger is NOT an indication of the person's politics (though admittedly, most of the movement is very right-wing at the moment), but rather it is an indication of how one will play the game. The Tea Party movement is an activism movment more than any single political agenda. As a liberal Tea Bagger, I share my colleagues' concerns about deficits and immigration reform, and I share their faith in populist activism, but I disagree with many of their ideas about how to address these problems. I am a Tea Bagger all the same.

There IS an effing good reason for the Tea Party to present an alternative reaction to the SOTUA. It strengthens the Tea Party movement and maintains its relevancy. The Tea Party movement has always been a political gamble in the way that it risks splitting votes and handing victories to the people who least represent the Tea Party agenda, but for those who self-identify as members of the movement, this risk is preferable to continuing to entrench the DC cultural status quo.

[Jacob]

Though "judgment" is arguably an aspect of "intelligence."

Says the conservative who voted for Obama.
perhaps you can withhold such withering judgment in this case to see what happens.
Im sure her IQ is not as high as yours or mine, but neither is most of the Senate. She is an intelligent woman who you disagree with.

[oxcoug]

Says the conservative who voted for Obama.
perhaps you can withhold such withering judgment in this case to see what happens.
Im sure her IQ is not as high as yours or mine, but neither is most of the Senate. She is an intelligent woman who you disagree with.

Of course my choice to vote for Obama - made largely on a whim in the voting booth in CA, mainly because the McCain-Palin combo was laughably un-electable and I knew my vote was purely a rhetorical act in a state where Obama led by 10 pts - had zero impact on anything.

Bachmann's act will have measurable impact on the quality of the public discussion immediately following the SOTU.

And I'd flatly deny that she's "intelligent" - intelligent people don't get baited into asinine public comments about investigating other politicians for "un-American" behavior. That moment alone was disqualifying.

She's also said that the real reason liberals come after her is that they're afraid she'll run for president. Also disqualifyingly stupid - most liberals would absolutely LOVE for her to end up being the Republican nominee.

I will grant that "intelligent" is a relative term and that in her hometown she might be in the 80th percentile and well above average on smarts. But she doesn't have the kind of intelligence necessary to be an effective national leader.