Bachmann's folly

Would you enroll in a school where the faculty didn't think schools were a useful institution?

Would you go to a church if the pastor said churches never help with our problems?

Would you choose a Mayor who didn't think a Mayor could make a difference?

Would you want your house painted by a person who didn't think painting was an important part of home maintenance?

Would you take your car to a mechanic who didn't think fixing cars was possible?

Yet that is precisely what MN Rep Michelle Bachmann is hoping the voters of Minnesota will do in her case. She's using that, in fact, as the basis for her so-called apology for her ridiculous tirade suggesting there are members of Congress, including Senator Barack Obama, who need to be investigated as potentially un-patriotic.

"Once again, our nation is at a crossroads and it's a time for choosing. We could embrace government as the answer to our problems or we can choose freedom and liberty..."

Why would we want to elect (or re-elect) somebody who doesn't believe government can be a positive force dealing with problems? The only reason they can have for running is self-aggrandizement and greed if they don't believe in the value of the role.

As apologies go, it's pretty weak. As logical arguments for casting one's ballot go, she's arguing in favor of her opponent, Elwyn "El" Tinklenberg. She's already driven donations his way; now it seems she's bent on the campaign equivalent of suicide. In the new Minnesota Public Radio poll, only 8% of voters said they were more likely to support Bachmann as a result of her remark that Obama "may have anti-American views" and her call for the news media to investigate the views of members of Congress. Nearly four of 10 likely voters in her 6th Congressional District say they are less likely.

Forked tongue?

In fact, when Ms. Bachmann said earlier this week that she regretted using the term "anti-American" many Minnesotans heard that oldest form of political double-talk - the kind that expresses profound regret not for what she thought, but rather for the fact it's caused so much backlash. She's not sorry she accused others of being unpatriotic, only that the voter reactions aren't what she'd hoped.

I ask again, in all seriousness: Why would we want to elect (or re-elect) somebody who doesn't believe government can be a positive force dealing with problems?

Digg this story!