Bachmann Literally Praised Government Pork In Letter To Obama Official

obvious Child · Jun 28, 2011

Grant said:
If the government is distorting market prices, and it seems they are in many areas, you should take that up with the Obama administration, not Michelle Bachmann.

Wow way to completely miss the entire point of why she's a hypocrite.

I realize I said no such thing. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

On the contrary, you argued exactly that. You just argued that government buying goods doesn't interfere with the market. So you are either a hack, or you don't understand why how government interferes.

I realize that Leftists don't believe hypocrisy is scandal-worthy, given that they wallow in it, but it is a scandal to those who expect more from their political representatives.

If I'm a lefty, so is Goldwater. Not to mention Newt. You really want to go there? Hint: This tends to end exceptionally badly for fools who call me a lefty.

You said she was "anti-government everything". Either prove it with a link, or take it back.

It was not a "market stabilizer".

Wrong. TARP directly stabilized interbank lending which the entire banking system is based on. You really outta to change your lean. You are anything but an independent.

Can you point out where she wanted price controls in Minnesota? And you should understand the "spending" by now.

Do you understand the concept of a price floor?

Seriously, you're doing an awful job of pretending to be an independent.

obvious Child · Jun 28, 2011

ptif219 said:
How so since the government is going to purchase them she should try to get it to be from her state.

Furthering my argument you have no problem when Republicans are arguing for more government, but the second a Democrat tries to cut government, it's evil.

You are the poster child for hypocrisy.

Grant · Jun 28, 2011

Sgt Meowenstein said:
The bottom line is that she took advantage of some gov't spending out of one side of her mouth while bashing gov't spending out of the other side. It's not that what she did was bad. It's that she says one thing but does another. It's hypocritical and inconsistent. I'm not surprised. I'm just pointing it out.

No, the real bottom line is that you attempted to create something out of nothing, a scandal where none exists.

And as the election years continues I expect there will be more of these attempts by the Left to further demonize political candidates, with the real issues the United States faces being ignored or hidden. The Left is trivializing politics, their country and crudely attacking any good people who choose to serve.

If people really get the type of government they deserve, the Left would get another four years of Barrack Obama. But that would drag the good people down with them.

justabubba · Jun 28, 2011

Grant said:
No, the real bottom line is that you attempted to create something out of nothing, a scandal where none exists.

for that to be true, bachmann would have not written a letter to the department of agriculture advocating more government intervention in the pork bellies market. yet we know she did ... while hypocritically assailing a government which spends its tax dollars on subsidies

And as the election years continues I expect there will be more of these attempts by the Left to further demonize political candidates, with the real issues the United States faces being ignored or hidden. The Left is trivializing politics, their country and crudely attacking any good people who choose to serve.

translation: quit posting evidence that our reich wing candidates all have clay feet

If people really get the type of government they deserve, the Left would get another four years of Barrack Obama. But that would drag the good people down with them.

the ONLY thing Obama has going for him is the inability of the republican party to identify someone with the competence to be a viable alternative in 2012

Grant · Jun 28, 2011

justabubba said:
for that to be true, bachmann would have not written a letter to the department of agriculture advocating more government intervention in the pork bellies market. yet we know she did ... while hypocritically assailing a government which spends its tax dollars on subsidies

translation: quit posting evidence that our reich wing candidates all have clay feet

the ONLY thing Obama has going for him is the inability of the republican party to identify someone with the competence to be a viable alternative in 2012

So you feel that Michelle Bachman is a hypocrite but Barrack Obama has always been sincere, stood by his principle, has been honest with the American people and doing a good job as President.

I'm looking forward to the Presidential debates when BHO calls her a hypocrite because of this pork belly issue.

justabubba · Jun 28, 2011

Grant said:
So you feel that Michelle Bachman is a hypocrite but Barrack Obama has always been sincere, stood by his principle, has been honest with the American people and doing a good job as President.

I'm looking forward to the Presidential debates when BHO calls her a hypocrite because of this pork belly issue.

i read your post and can only conclude english is not your first language. i come to that observation because i stated this previously:

the ONLY thing Obama has going for him is the inability of the republican party to identify someone with the competence to be a viable alternative in 2012

in no way did i state

... Obama has always been sincere, stood by his principle, has been honest with the American people and doing a good job as President

it appears you are either confused about the use of language or you are attempting to manipulate the facts to show them to be other than they have been posted

Objective Voice · Jun 28, 2011

ptif219 said:
If the product was bought for government use say the military she did nothing wrong. Of course that does not matter to liberals

Then show that the subsidies went to feed our soldiers and sailors and convulesing veterans in VA Hospitals. Prove that the subsidies Bachmann procured went to "defense" - a constitutional enumarate - and I'm 100% in your corner that she acquired said subsidy for the right reason as constitutioannly defined by Conservatives and Libertarians alike.

Objective Voice · Jun 28, 2011

Grant said:
Where was she interfering in the market?? The government buys food stuffs for the military. for example, and she would like them to buy Minnesota products. If she becomes President then she will encourage others to buy American goods. This is not "interfering in the market". This is promoting the people you represent.

This is not the scandal you're hoping for, but you keep digging.

Again, if that was, in fact, the reason for the purchase, you'd have to prove it. Otherwise, if those food stuffs did not go to feed our men and women in uniform, then the government purchase did have an artificial affect on the marketplace because it wasn't consumers who make up the free market system who made that bulk purchase. It was the federal government. By default, one could reasonable argue that the government itself interferred with the commodities market (pork) at the request of a politician.

Objective Voice · Jun 28, 2011

Grant said:
Right. She wants the government to buy her state's products, something that has never occurred to any other politician.

For that idea alone she deserves to be President.

But here's the thing...

If Backmann believes in the free market system as she claims she does and she's against government interference in those markets, why then wouldn't she go to other private companies and have them make these purchases? After all, Conservatives keep saying that the only way to spur job growth is through the private sector, right? So, if she really believes this why didn't she go to private companies, seek their assistance in investing in the purchase of these commodities, thereby employee more people, thereby actually infusing capital into the free market system?

I know the answer to this question...do you?

Objective Voice · Jun 28, 2011

ptif219 said:
If the purchase is for the military or schools or the poor your point is moot

Again, prove that that's where those commodities went to...they the purchase of Minnesota pork went straight to the military and public schools. Without that prove, your arguments are invalid.

Objective Voice · Jun 28, 2011

Grant said:
And this will be the main issue with Obamaniacs. It's pitiful what America has become.

Grant said:
So you feel that Michelle Bachman is a hypocrite but Barrack Obama has always been sincere, stood by his principle, has been honest with the American people and doing a good job as President.

I'm looking forward to the Presidential debates when BHO calls her a hypocrite because of this pork belly issue.

The topic isn't about the President, his economic policy nor his actions. It's about Congresswoman Bachmann. Try to stay on point and not deflect, please.

OpportunityCost · Jun 28, 2011

Commodity Foods - food, nutrition, needs, body, diet, health, eating, Commodity Supplemental Food Program

Search on "DOA commodity buys, where does the food go?" revealed the following link at number 1.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) administers several programs that distribute commodity foods, which are foods that the federal government has the legal authority to purchase and distribute in order to support farm prices. The first commodity distribution program began during the Great Depression of the 1930s, when it was known as the Needy Family Program. This was the main form of food assistance for low-income people in the United States until the Food Stamp Program was expanded in the early 1970s. The Needy Family Program distributed surplus agricultural commodities such as cheese, butter, and other items directly to low-income people. Today, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, administers the nation's commodity food distribution programs. The programs continue to improve the nutrition status of low-income people, while providing a means for using surplus agricultural commodities from U.S. farm programs.

So, I guess it gets put to good use, according to this site.

But...Objective Voice, its hard to find out what really happened, because of the lazy reporting. They were interested in playing gotcha with Bachmann, not in finding out how the commodities were used. Lack of evidence on what its used for would lie with the reporters being in a position to ask Dept of Ag officials but didnt do so because it didnt further the agenda behind the story---getting negative press on Bachmann.

Objective Voice · Jun 28, 2011

OpportunityCost said:
Commodity Foods - food, nutrition, needs, body, diet, health, eating, Commodity Supplemental Food Program

Search on "DOA commodity buys, where does the food go?" revealed the following link at number 1.

So, I guess it gets put to good use, according to this site.

But...Objective Voice, its hard to find out what really happened, because of the lazy reporting. They were interested in playing gotcha with Bachmann, not in finding out how the commodities were used. Lack of evidence on what its used for would lie with the reporters being in a position to ask Dept of Ag officials but didnt do so because it didnt further the agenda behind the story---getting negative press on Bachmann.

Alright, so let's say it was "gotcha" liberal media reporting. Isn't it still incumbant on Congresswoman Bachmann to provide the details concerning such a large federally financed purchase for here constituents? You may want to let her off the hook, but if I (still) lived in Minnesota and learned about this and knew her distain for "big government, goverment intrution on the marketplace and government subsidies," I'd be demanding that she provide the residents of Minnesota with some answers. And my #1 question to her would be:

Objective Voice said:
If Backmann believes in the free market system as she claims she does and she's against government interference in those markets, why then wouldn't she go to other private companies and have them make these purchases?

OpportunityCost · Jun 28, 2011

Objective Voice said:
Alright, so let's say it was "gotcha" liberal media reporting. Isn't it still incumbant on Congresswoman Bachmann to provide the details concerning such a large federally financed purchase for here constituents? You may want to let her off the hook, but if I (still) lived in Minnesota and learned about this and knew her distain for "big government, goverment intrution on the marketplace and government subsidies," I'd be demanding that she provide the residents of Minnesota with some answers. And my #1 question to her would be:

If Backmann believes in the free market system as she claims she does and she's against government interference in those markets, why then wouldn't she go to other private companies and have them make these purchases?

Because that food went directly to government programs for poor families. Do I agree with how it was arranged? Nope. Do I think Bachmann should have taken the money? Nope. Do I think she was fully aware of the subsidy on a family farm she doesnt run? Nope. Do I think she benefitted directly? Yes. I think the thing for her to do is to man up, admit about the farm subsidies and possibly look at repayment in the amount she and only she benefitted. Thats how I would handle it if I were handling her image.

Grant · Jun 29, 2011

Sgt Meowenstein said:
The bottom line is that she took advantage of some gov't spending out of one side of her mouth while bashing gov't spending out of the other side. It's not that what she did was bad. It's that she says one thing but does another. It's hypocritical and inconsistent. I'm not surprised. I'm just pointing it out.

And you point out these inconsistencies with all politicians, or just female politicians?

ptif219 · Jul 4, 2011

justabubba said:
what we do know is bachmann liked that the government intervened in the hog bellies market
we have her letter to the department of agriculture to prove it

so she is against government intervention and the government subsidies ... unless she is for it

What were the products used for? Unless you can prove the government bought it with out a need for it your point makes no sense

ptif219 · Jul 4, 2011

justabubba said:
what is pitiful is those kool aid drinkers who support and defend republican hypocrisy

Which is different from democrat hypocrisy?

ptif219 · Jul 4, 2011

obvious Child said:
Furthering my argument you have no problem when Republicans are arguing for more government, but the second a Democrat tries to cut government, it's evil.

You are the poster child for hypocrisy.

I am not. I am saying if it was bought and used for government issue it was needed. No one has shown where the product went after purchase

ptif219 · Jul 4, 2011

Objective Voice said:
Then show that the subsidies went to feed our soldiers and sailors and convulesing veterans in VA Hospitals. Prove that the subsidies Bachmann procured went to "defense" - a constitutional enumarate - and I'm 100% in your corner that she acquired said subsidy for the right reason as constitutioannly defined by Conservatives and Libertarians alike.

Let the people claiming she is a hypocrite prove their point.

ptif219 · Jul 4, 2011

Objective Voice said:
Again, prove that that's where those commodities went to...they the purchase of Minnesota pork went straight to the military and public schools. Without that prove, your arguments are invalid.

You prove it since you say she is a hypocrite than show proof.

haymarket · Jul 4, 2011

ptif219 said:
You prove it since you say she is a hypocrite than show proof.

Let me guess? This is another one of those threads where poster after poster presents clear evidence of a fact, but because of your own self imposed belief system you disagree with that fact, and you keep demanding more evidence while all the time denying what has been presented.

ptif219 · Jul 4, 2011

haymarket said:
Let me guess? This is another one of those threads where poster after poster presents clear evidence of a fact, but because of your own self imposed belief system you disagree with that fact, and you keep demanding more evidence while all the time denying what has been presented.

Who has proven what? We just found out it goes to feed the poor. So this means the hypocrisy is much less.

Should Bachmann sit buy while other states get this deal?

Jetboogieman · Jul 4, 2011

ptif219 said:
Who has proven what? We just found out it goes to feed the poor. So this means the hypocrisy is much less.

Should Bachmann sit buy while other states get this deal?

If shes principles yes.

Because by extension whether the food goes to the poor or not... Is irrelevant, she's a hypocrite accepting money from the federal government to prop up something that wouldn't exist with out.

And it getting propped up, to feed the poor means that she's a...

Wait for it everyone...

A...

SOCIALIST

ptif219 · Jul 4, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
If shes principles yes.

Because by extension whether the food goes to the poor or not... Is irrelevant, she's a hypocrite accepting money from the federal government to prop up something that wouldn't exist with out.

And it getting propped up, to feed the poor means that she's a...

Wait for it everyone...

A...

SOCIALIST

Wrong you are. She is against the subsidies that are not necessary she is not against feeding the poor. the hypocrisy seems to me to be on the liberals who now are against feeding the poor.

Jetboogieman · Jul 4, 2011

ptif219 said:
Wrong you are. She is against the subsidies that are not necessary she is not against feeding the poor. the hypocrisy seems to me to be on the liberals who now are against feeding the poor.

So you're saying she is a hypocrite then... She's against subsidies but uses them...

Do you have any idea how almost every time you speak, you defeat your own argument...

Bachmann Literally Praised Government Pork In Letter To Obama Official

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater

Grant

justabubba

long standing member

Grant

justabubba

long standing member

Objective Voice

Objective Voice

Objective Voice

Objective Voice

Objective Voice

OpportunityCost

Objective Voice

OpportunityCost

Grant

ptif219

ptif219

ptif219

ptif219

ptif219

haymarket

ptif219

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

ptif219

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon