The Big E Posts

Reactions to Rep. Michele Bachmann's Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theory continue to roll in. Rep. John Kline (R-MN), former Sen. Norm Coleman and former Director of the FBI William Webster condemned Bachmann while House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) almost sort of defended her in a very Cantoresque way. They reacted to letters she and four other Congress Members wrote alleging "deep penetration" into our government and the fallout after she was pushed for facts which she didn't have. The outcry has mainly been her slanderous attack (direct from Joe McCarthy's playbook) on Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

I'll begin with Webster:

"This is unfair, counterproductive, and it's probably, in some respects, illegal or tortuous to be saying those things," Webster says. "But more importantly, it gets in the way of our being able to prevent terrorist acts from happening."

Webster notes that as part of a background investigation to obtain a top-secret security clearance, the FBI would have looked into any questionable tie.

"This is unfortunate because we're trying to build relationships with Muslims now in order to be sure that their good citizens help us in keeping terrorist attacks from happening," Webster says. "We need the people who are most likely to know about a plot in time to do us some good, and they are often the people that will be blackened because of their religion or ethnicity."

Webster compares Bachmann's comment to President Roosevelt's order to imprison innocent Japanese-Americans in internment camps during World War II. The former FBI director points out that many public figures have relatives who are convicted criminals or connected with a questionable group. That does not mean they condone their actions or support them.

I'm not really sure what to make of Cantor's reaction. He's not backing up his boss, he's kinda sorta defending Bachmann in a very tepid way. Maybe he's still wanting to get in with the teabagger crowd without actually taking a position on anything. Typical Cantor.

Asked by CBS host Charlie Rose whether Bachmann was "out of line," Cantor declined to criticize the congresswoman.

"I think that if you read some of the reports that have covered the story, I think that her concern was about the security of the country. So it's about all I know," the House's No. 2 Republican told CBS's "This Morning."

Cantor's pretending to be an ignoramus? If only it were so. He knows exactly what she's alleging. He's been paying attention, he's just trying to minimize what she's demanding.

Quite pusillanimous of him, if you ask me.

Kline and Coleman were holding a press conference to talk about the economy. WCCO asked them for their opinion about Bachmann's conspiracy theory.

Add two Republicans to the chorus questioning U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann's call for an investigation of a State Department employee.

U.S. Rep. John Kline and former Sen. Norm Coleman say Bachmann stepped over the line in asking several federal departments to look into whether the Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated the U.S. government and was affecting policy.

Since Norm is notorious for never giving a direct "yes" or "no" answer, I'm shocked he condemned her.

Could it be that Minnesota journalists are finally growing a spine and demanding an answer before allowing weasels like Norm to talk about what the intended to talk about?

I love schadenfreude. I was going to write a post about Rep. Kurt Bills who only had $65,000 cash. He's running against Sen. Amy Klobuchar who has $5.5M. Bills in in bad shape because the MNGOP is in shambles.

The first-term state representative and high school economics teacher from Rosemount said he needs to do the work almost by himself because the Minnesota Republican Party has so many financial problems that it cannot help him.

The Republicans have a sex scandal in the news and a bitter inter-party war developing between Ron Paul minions and more traditional party members. Then there's the divisive nature of the teabaggers in their midst. They aren't necessarily Paul-bots, but they don't toe the party line and obey orders from above, either.

This is newsworthy especially when you consider how well the DFL is doing.

The DFL House Caucus announced today they'd raised $2 million in its effort to retake the State House of Representatives. They have $1.2 million in cash available to spend this election.

They are far ahead of previous years fundraising. The Caucus raised $813,140 during the same period in 2010 and $932,002 in 2008.

In 2011, the DFL reported its biggest ever off-year fundraising haul. In 2011, the MNGOP were plummeting towards insolvency. In 2012 the MNGOP weren't paying employees while the House DFL Caucus raised a record amount.
"The momentum is clearly on our side in this campaign to regain a DFL majority in the House," said Rep. Paul Thissen, the DFL Minority Leader. "The Republican priority of putting big corporations and the very richest Minnesotans ahead of what's best for middle class families is taking our state backwards. It's time for a middle class majority in the House that will focus on the issues that Minnesotans care about the most - like creating jobs, growing the economy and investing in our kids and their schools."

But don't forget that since corporations are people, they can simply write a few checks and their pals at the MNGOP will be ready to do their bidding.

"While we fully expect to be outraised and outspent by the House Republicans and their special interest allies, this strong showing of support from every corner of the state means we will have the resources needed to be competitive," said Zach Rodvold, the House DFL Campaign Director. "We know that voters overwhelmingly disapprove of the record of the Republican majorities, which is why the special interests will undoubtedly spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to protect them. But we have the candidates, we have the plan, and - if this unprecedented support holds - we will have the resources necessary to win in November."

Republican legislators protected the richest 1% of Minnesotans instead of doing what is best for Minnesota. They were unwilling to raise taxes on the richest 1% to create a real bonding bill that would create jobs, solve problems and help communities across the state improve.

Instead they passed the smallest bonding bill in the history of Minnesota.

In a feeble attempt to rectify their ineptitude, they passed a bill providing $47 million in grant money. It turns out this was like tossing a handful of pebbles into a stream to prevent an upcoming flood. 90 applications flooded in requesting $288 million.

Because the MNGOP is more interested in protecting the richest 1%, travesties like what the Rushford-Peterson school district faces is typical of what local communities are left to deal with. A flood inundated their school. The building has lasting damage and they want to replace it but they can't afford to on their own. They hoped to get included in the bonding bill this spring.

[Schools Superintendent Chuck Ehler] hops on a chair, lifts up the ceiling tile and shines his flashlight into the dark abyss to reveal the cracked plaster overhead. The plaster is made with horsehair and dates back to when the school was built in 1906. This is one example of the school building's deteriorating condition, which was exacerbated five years ago when a massive flood struck the town. Attempts by school leaders over several years to get help from the state to build a new school have failed.

As a result, school leaders have given up hopes of building a $29 million K-12 school building to replace the old building. They are instead pushing plans for a $14 to $15 million elementary school. They've also made one last-ditch effort to get funding from the state. They have applied for $7.5 million in funds from an economic development grant from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. But with 89 other projects battling for a $47.5 million grant pool, officials acknowledge they face tough odds.

"It's just disappointing to me, because I think I know the answer already, but we have to keep trying," said Rushford-Peterson School Board Chairwoman Angela Colbenson.

(Rochester Post Bulletin)

Rep. Mary Franson (R-Alexandria) has a knack for keeping her name in the headlines. This time its for dismissing the restraining order she took out against former boyfriend Eric Harpel. Harpel is Chair of the McLeod County Republicans.

"I believe we can handle this issue outside the courtroom and continue working with our attorneys in this matter," Franson wrote in the court filing. "It is my hope that Mr. Harpel can be trusted to continue working through our attorneys to resolve this issue without a courtroom and press."

Franson took our a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend on May 10, saying he "stalked" her, made threats, and sent "lewd" emails after they broke up in January. In a particularly colorful passage from the restraining order filing, Franson writes about what allegedly happened when she asked Harpel about some stuff she left at his place: "I asked him when I could get my belongings and he said he wanted my panties in exchange," she wrote.

(City Pages)

I find this whole sordid tale confusing. On the one hand, I believe that any woman who feels threatened by an Ex should have the law on their side. There are A LOT of ****bags out there who abuse women.

Yet, Franson and her fellow Republicans consistently vote against violence prevention programs and victims services. So I'm glad that our laws in Minnesota to protect women from ****bags haven't been dismantled.

On the other hand, Franson is an evangelical who was living in sin. She also has a propensity to say and do unhinged things. Harpel has always maintained his innocence and demanded his day in court to clear his name.

Maybe higher ups in the MNGOP sat her down or maybe both of them and told them to move on. Maybe Franson made it all up. Maybe Harpel behaved as she claimed.

All I know for certain is that this won't be the last time Mary Franson is in the headlines for something unseemly.

A wide variety of Christian organizations as well as Hindus, humanists, Jews and atheists (I think that encapsulates the list) all signed a letter protesting Rep. Michele Bachmann's Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theory. She alleged that The Brotherhood has "deeply penetrated" (her sexual metaphor, not mine) our government. She requested a witch hunt that would make Joseph McCarthy proud. These groups join a wide array of Republicans who have condemned Bachmann.

The 42 undersigned religious, secular, interfaith, advocacy, legal and community organizations are united by our work to protect religious freedom for all. As such, we write to raise our voices in protest of your recent letters regarding prominent American Muslim individuals and organizations. These letters question the loyalty of faithful Americans based on nothing more than their religious affiliations and what is at best tenuous evidence of their associations. As such, your actions have serious implications for religious freedom and the health of our democracy.

(Star Tribune)

Thankfully, it seems that America has learned the appropriate lessons from the McCarthy era. I find it heart-warming that all of these groups are protesting Bachmann's cynical fear-mongering.

Far from supporting the safety of our country, these accusations distract us from examining legitimate threats using proven, evidence-based security strategies. Moreover, we know all too well the danger of casting suspicion on loyal and innocent Americans simply because they hold particular beliefs. We will not stand idly by and allow our country to revive federalinvestigations into innocent individuals based on their religious adherence. We will continue to speak out in support of people of all faiths and no faith, and the religious freedom of all Americans to practice or choose not to practice a religion without fear of criticism or suspicion.

The State Department and Homeland Security apparently weren't very impressed with Rep. Michele Bachmann's (R-MN) Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theory. They won't be investigating any of her accusations of the Brotherhood's "deep penetration" (her sexual metaphore, not mine) into our government.

Mainly because her conspiracy theory is shameless fear-mongering and has no basis in fact:

The controversy over Rep. Michele Bachmann's (R-MN) Islamophobic witch-hunt was kicked off by a series of letters from her and colleagues demanding that the Inspectors General of four government agencies investigate "deep penetration" by the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. government. But during an interview with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), CNN's Anderson Cooper reported that two of the agencies have no intention of launching investigations.

During the interview, Cooper said:

We called the inspectors general involved here. Two of the five [sic] agencies, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department, told us they had no plans to investigate. And both were clear that a request like this is outside the inspectors general mandate, saying that they look at the effectiveness of programs. They look for waste, fraud, abuse.

Watch the video:

Allen Quist and Mike Parry are duking it out down along the southern border of Minnesota. On September 6, 2012 ... erm ... August 14th, actually, they face off in the Republican primary. In the meantime, these two clowns are showing why they are so unelectable:

The New Ulm Journal reported Wednesday that Quist called Parry "an embarrassment to the Republican Party" after Parry's campaign urged Quist to "man up" and take responsibility for controversial statements Quist made about homosexuality and other social issues in the 1990s. Parry adviser Ben Golnik told the newspaper that Quist is "unelectable."

Quist said the comments were taken out of context and accused Parry of running an "entirely negative" campaign that will hurt Republicans' chances in the November election.

Quist has long history of homophobia. Parry is quite homophobic himself.

I'm surprised that Parry hasn't brought up that Quist is an unrepentant farm subsidy junkie. Though I am glad to see that Parry's homophobic and racist tweets are back in the news:

Congressional candidate Mike Parry's campaign sent an email Tuesday highlighting controversial actions and statements made by his Republican primary opponent, but Parry, too, has some antagonistic remarks in his past.

Parry - through campaign advisor Ben Golnik - called for fellow Republican congressional candidate Allen Quist to "man up and explain what he meant by these outrageous comments."

Parry was asked later Tuesday if he'd be willing to do the same with observations he made on Twitter in May of 2009, about six months before he  ran for the state Senate in a special election.

In one, Parry tweeted: "What's with Dems and Pedophiles?"

A second referenced the president: "read the exclusive on Mr O in Newsweek. He is a Power Hungry Arrogant Black Man."

Parry asserts that this is old news and he's "moved forward." Truthfully, he hasn't. He's still the same angry, unstable man he was back then.

Right wing nut jobs have been leaping to the defense of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN). Many prominent Republicans condemned her for attacking Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's aide Huma Abedin. Interestingly, no conservative has criticized her for attacking fellow Member of Congress Keith Ellison (DFL-MN). Mainstream Republicans realize she's vaulted any threshold of decency with her McCarthyism.

But note the following list of clowns.

Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, John Bolton, Frank Gaffney, Rep. Louie "Terror Babies" Gohmert, CNN's Dana Loesch have all stepped up to defend Bachmann's McCarthyism.

Rush Limbaugh just loves himself a witch hunt.

Well recently, Michele Bachmann and other Republicans sent a letter to the State Department expressing concerns -- I'm really summarizing this part of it -- expressing concern over the presence of Huma Abedin, so close to the powers that be in our government. She's Hillary Clinton's, one of her top-level aides.

[...]

But Huma's mother is best friends with the wife of the new Muslim Brotherhood president Egypt. And there is essentially a Muslim sisterhood that she's a member of. And Huma's father was also likewise involved.

So Michele Bachmann and others have written a letter to the State Department wanting some clarification, wanting an investigation to find out if -- because the Muslim Brotherhood is not what they are portrayed to be, the Muslim Brotherhood is not the -- what's the best way to put this? They're not, you know, the good mafia. The Muslim Brotherhood is being portrayed as a bunch of secularists, mainstream, non-radical, and Andy says no they're not. They are right down the middle as radical as anybody else in Jihad. And so it's a legitimate request from Michele Bachmann.

Newt Gingrich tries to walk back her conspiracy theory trying to pretend she was only asking a question and not accusing Abedin and Ellison of sedition.

"There weren't allegations, there was a question," Gingrich told VandeHei and Allen, adding, "the question ought to be asked across the board" about the Muslim Brotherhood's relationship with and goals in the U.S. are.

When it was pointed out to him that other Republicans, such as Sen. John McCain and House Speaker John Boehner, have hit Bachmann for a form of a witch hunt, he said, "I think those folks are wrong...what is it they're afraid of learning?"

Gingrich wasn't speaking specifically about Abedin. But by demurring on that issue, he left it on the table.

Rep. Louie "Terror Babies" Gohmert simply loses his s**t and calls McCain "numb nuts."

"Normally you don't go blast somebody on the floor who is a colleague on the same side of the aisle unless you touch base with them," Gohmert complained during an appearance on the Dennis Miller Show on Tuesday, referring to McCain's denunciation of the group's allegations as "nothing less than an unwarranted and unfounded attack." The fiery Texan then launched into a personal attack against McCain, calling him "numb nuts" and suggesting the Muslim Brotherhood is now influencing him too:

GOHMERT: Well, it's obvious that John McCain didn't even read the letter because of what he said in accusing Michele and us of making these horrible accusations. There were five letters and there were many things that are stated that are facts in each letter. And I wish some of these numb nuts would go out and read the letter before they make these horrible allegations about the horrible accusations we're making. But we also know that John McCain himself had said back in the early stages of stuff going on in Egypt that he was, in his words, "unalterably opposed to helping the Muslim Brotherhood." Well, obviously the unalterable person has been altered, so he is okay with it now.

John "Mustache Rides" Bolton wants to bomb Iran and loves himself any kind of Islamophobia. He's also a Romney advisor on the Middle East. He tries to walk back her accusations of sedition as merely asking questions.

Bolton has direct ties to the Romney campaign, serving as an unpaid adviser that regularly appears at campaign events stumping for the presumptive GOP presidential nominee. "John Bolton insists on good results for America and is someone I respect," Romney said in December. "I think he's a fine man with great capacity."

On Gaffney's radio show today (Gaffney is the brains behind Bachmann's campaign), Bolton said Bachmann and some of her fellow Republicans are just asking questions, adding that he's "mystified" by the criticism Bachmann has received:

BOLTON: What I think these members of Congress have done is simply raise the question, to a variety of inspectors general in key agencies, are your departments following their own security clearance guidelines, are they adhering to the standards that presumably everybody who seeks a security clearance should have to go through, are they making special exemptions? What is wrong with raising the question? Why is even asking whether we are living up to our standards a legitimate area of congressional oversight, why has that generated this criticism? I'm just mystified by it.

CNN's Dana Loesch tries to pretend that they were merely questions.

Looking especially at how some of our foreign policy has been handled, Hillary Clinton essentially siding with the Muslim Brotherhood candidate in Egypt, and then it was discovered that her top aide -- Huma Abedin -- is essentially a member of the female version of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Muslim Sisterhood. All of this -- it seems enough to me to pose questions as to why our government is becoming so close with a group that has been so hostile to the United States, has fought against the United States, has sided with terrorists, and is a very oppressive regime that believes in Sharia law.

Apparently so much as asking assurances from congress that individuals are vetted -- especially now that we're endorsing Egyptian candidates whose very party affiliation so appalled Senator John McCain just a year ago -- is forbidden. I'll repeat: there are people within the Republican party who feel that asking questions of Congress and the administration is forbidden. Any declaration on the character of any individuals named was the supposition of the media and people like McCain.

All that is situationally excusable with the emergence of Bachmann as a target. It's convenient. She's long been the bane of certain Republicans because her record, while not as distinguished or completely demonstrative of Article 1 Section 8, is more conservative than most, and she's resented for it. Resented -- and disliked because she can't be molded into submission.

America's foremost Islamophobic nutjob and Bachmann advisor Frank Gaffney leapt to her defense. By condemning Bachmann Republicans are condemning Gaffney as Bachmann is just pushing his conspiracy theory. So of course Gaffney vociferously defends Bachmann.

Fortunately, it turns out that as we confront our time's most imminent threat to freedom, we have found America's Iron Lady: Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Her Thatcheresque qualities are evident in the fearless and visionary leadership she is providing in opposing Shariah's most formidable champions, the Muslim Brotherhood.

[...]

At the moment, Mrs. Bachmann is not facing mere name-calling but outright character assassination. She has been singled out for special treatment despite the fact that she was one of five members of Congress (the others were Reps. Louie Gohmert of Texas, Trent Franks of Arizona, Lynn A. Westmoreland of Georgia and Thomas J. Rooney of Florida) who had the temerity to send to the federal inspector general formal requests for investigations into Muslim Brotherhood influence operations inside our government. That's a threat every bit as dangerous as the communist subversion of a generation ago.

It is, of course, no accident that Mrs. Bachmann is being subjected to such vilification by the Islamists, their allies on the left and in the establishment media's amen chorus. As a principled, articulate and wildly popular Tea Party leader and conservative, she is a prime target for electoral defeat by her political foes. These include her fellow Minnesotan, Rep. Keith Ellison, the "first Muslim congressman," who launched the initial attack on our Iron Lady. More on him in a moment.

[...]

With respect to efforts to dismiss as dangerous or baseless concerns about a possible, far larger problem with individuals who have connections to the Muslim Brotherhood shaping U.S. policy toward that organization and enabling its rising power, what can one say? There is abundant evidence that indicates such concerns are warranted. Until the critics -- on Capitol Hill, in the media and elsewhere -- perform the sort of due diligence that has characterized the approach taken by Mrs. Bachmann and her colleagues, their authority on the matter must be questioned.

Republicans across the nation are doing everything they can to suppress Democratic-leaning constituencies from voting. In Wisconsin while they controlled the legislature and Governor (they lost the Senate in the recall elections recently), they passed a Voter ID vote suppression law. Last Sunday, Republican State Senator Glenn Grothman explained the their vote suppression would reduce enough Democrats from voting that if the race in Wisconsin was close, Mitt Romney would win.

In an interview with ThinkProgress on Sunday, the number-two Republican senator argued that voter ID could be a boon for Republicans' electoral prospects if the controversial law, which was recently blocked in state court, is reinstated in time for the November election. "Insofar as there are inappropriate things, people who vote inappropriately are more likely to vote Democrat," argued Grothman.

KEYES: If it were upheld and in place in time for the November election, do you think - polls have shown a pretty razor-thin margin - do you think it might ultimately help Romney's campaign here in the state?

GROTHMAN: Yes. Right. I think we believe that insofar as there are inappropriate things, people who vote inappropriately are more likely to vote Democrat.

KEYES: So if these protections are in place of voter ID, that might ultimately help him in a close race?

GROTHMAN: Right. I think if people cheat, we believe the people who cheat are more likely to vote against us.

This kind of news makes me really appreciate that Mark Dayton beat Tom Emmer.

Rep. Chip Cravaack (R-MN/NH) hides from his constituents. He never holds well-publicized, free, public events in major cities in the evening. This way few liberals will show up to talk to him his staffers (as he rarely visits MN). For example, he's only held one free, public event in Duluth, MN. He only did it at the last minute after significant constituent pressure.

There is a reason he does this.

This week, Take Action Minnesota held a 99 Percent Uniting Day of Action to Raise the Minimum Wage rally urging Cravaack to increase the minimum wage. Of course, Cravaack wasn't available for the event. As far as I can tell, Cravaack only comes to Minnesota for public events three times every two months. If he travels here from DC or New Hampshire more frequently than that, we don't know as he won't release any documentation.

When contacted by local media about these demands to raise the minimum wage, a staffer answered the question (not Cravaack):

A spokesperson for Representative Chip Cravaack said,"Based on conversations with constituents, Rep. Cravaack finds it unlikely that increasing the minimum wage, along with the President's proposed tax increase on nearly one million small businesses, would help create Minnesota jobs."

(Northland NewsCenter)

[my emphasis]

Since Cravaack never speaks with constituents who don't agree with him, he wouldn't know that most constituents probably want the minimum wage raised. This is why he never holds well-publicized, free, public events in major cities in the evening. He is being honest. He's never spoken to anyone about this. Its key to his strategy.

Secondly, he brings up President Obama's plan to extend the Bush Tax Cuts to everyone but the richest 2%. Cravaack lies about who would be negatively affected.

Most small business owners would not be affected.
Cravaack wants everyone to believe that the vast majority of small business owners would be affected by Obama's plan to end the Bush Tax Cuts. This simply isn't true.

On January 1st, 2013, millions of middle-class families will see their taxes go up if Congress fails to act, costing a typical family of four $2,200. President Obama is calling on Congress to extend tax cuts for the 98 percent of Americans making less than $250,000 and allow the Bush tax cuts to expire for the top 2 percent of wealthy Americans-reestablishing the income tax rates under President Clinton.

The President's plan extends tax cuts for 97 percent of American small-business owners, building on the 18 tax cuts for small businesses that he has already signed into law-all of which help them grow and create jobs.

(BarackObama.com)

Secondly, when the minimum wage goes up, the people making minimum wage have more money in their pockets. They might first pay bills they've been trouble paying. If they have money left over, these people spend that extra money. They certainly won't tuck it away in a Swiss Bank account.

A study by the Chicago Federal Reserve found that households with minimum wage workers increase their spending when the minimum wage goes up.

EPI estimates that the increase to $7.25 will, over the course of the following 12 months, boost consumer spending by over $5.5 billion.

(Economic Policy Institute)

More spending by the working class means more demand for dinners at restaurants, family outings, etc. More demand means local businesses hire more workers.

Furthermore, Raising the minimum wage does not cause job losses:

A 1998 EPI study failed to find any systematic, significant job loss associated with the 1996-97 minimum wage increase (Bernstein and Schmitt 1998). In fact, following the most recent increase in the minimum wage in 1996-97, the low-wage labor market performed better than it had in decades (e.g., lower unemployment rates, increased average hourly wages, increased family income, decreased poverty rates).

Studies of the 1990-91 federal minimum wage increase, as well as studies by David Card and Alan Krueger of several state minimum wage increases, also found no measurable negative impact on employment.

New economic models that look specifically at low-wage labor markets help explain why there is little evidence of job loss associated with minimum wage increases. These models recognize that employers may be able to absorb some of the costs of a wage increase through higher productivity, lower recruiting and training costs, decreased absenteeism, and increased worker morale.

A recent Fiscal Policy Institute (FPI) study of state minimum wages found no evidence of negative employment effects on small businesses.

(Economic Policy Institute)

He's implying that the job creators will only create jobs if they have more money in their pockets. And when he means job creators, he means the 1%.

What underlies all this is that Cravaack believes in Underpants Gnomes Economic Theory.

Cravaack, like most Republicans, believes in this theory in which if the 1% have the lowest possible taxes, they won't put the money in a Swiss Bank account, but will somehow hire people to do stuff. It's not exactly logical, but that's what he believes.

As someone who has followed Rep. Michele Bachmann for a while, I've continually been amazed how she could survive gaffe after debunked lie after insane conspiracy theory blowing up in her face. Up until recently, she was only relevant in Minnesota and amongst her far right fans across the country.

She never got in all that much trouble because of the shameful coverage by Minensota's media.

But then she ran for President. With her increased presence, real journalists reported on her. These journalists didn't ignore her lies, gaffes and conspiracy theories. Some even analyzed what she said (something Minnesota journalists refused to do).

Aaron Blake at the Washington Post reaches this conclusion about how her Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theory is spinning out of her ability to control, backpedal and ignore:

... what Bachmann is alleging is on a whole new level from her previous allegations. While she alleged in 2007 that Iran had plans to turn parts of Iraq into a terrorist haven, accusing U.S. government officials of being involved in a terrorist conspiracy is different.

The former charge may not pass the smell test or be based on any public evidence, but it's not too far afield that many would disbelieve it. After all, Iran is the bad guy.

The latter would be a scandal the likes of which this country has rarely - if ever - seen. And Bachmann is making the allegation against American citizens.

It remains to be seen whether Bachmann has done enough to cause herself any problems in the November election. What she has done is torpedoed any political capital she might have had left over from her brief moment in the spotlight during the GOP presidential nominating contest last year.

[my emphasis]

But then David Graham at the Atlantic Monthly has to go and poo all over my little shark-jumping parade. He gives three reasons why Bachmann won't be slipping into irrelevancy:

1. National Popularity: Bachmann might be out of favor with her leaders, but she maintains a strong following among Tea Party supporters nationally. Criticism from Boehner and McCain, both of whom remain suspect in the GOP's insurgent wing, will do nothing to temper that. Her large organic base makes her tough to quietly set aside, and her penchant for making outlandish claims means there's plenty of demand for her to appear on camera.
2. Money: One result of that popularity is that Bachmann also has no want of money and needn't rely on standard party channels. She already has an eye-popping $15 million war chest for her reelection campaign, larger than many Senate campaigns.
3. Redistricting: Democrats would love to pick Bachmann off, and they thought they had a good chance two years ago, but she comfortably defeated Tarryl Clark. This year, they think they have another good shot with businessman Jim Graves. But not only will Graves likely be outspent, he's running in a more challenging district than Clark. Though Bachmann has always been pretty far to the right for Minnesota, redistricting has given her a more conservative constituency than before, adding some tailwind. Jake Sherman visited Bachmann's district and delivered a great dispatch, including this laughable moment:

   Rachel Olson, a 41-year-old from Isanti said flatly that she doesn't "think [Bachmann] would make something up."

   Olson may not be representative of the district, but there's a reason Bachmann's been more successful at home than she was as a presidential candidate.

While a number of prominent Republicans have denounced Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) for attacking US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's aide, Huma Abedin, not a single Republican has denounced her attack on her fellow member of Congress and fellow Minnesotan Rep. Keith Ellison (DFL-MN). She accused Ellison of sedition, of having ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

She has yet to offer any proof. In her Bizarro World, her accusation should be enough to trigger an investigation into Ellison.

However, she attack violated House Ethics. On page 12 it states:

A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House shall conduct himself at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.

Bachmann's wild accusations do not make her or the institution look good.

She also fails to "Adhere to the highest moral principles;" (p.20). Baseless slander isn't exactly adhering to any moral principles.

So far 2012 is a really bad, nasty and tough year for the MNGOP. The sex scandal between their Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch and Deputy Party Chair and Senate Communications Director Michael Brodkorb won't go away anytime soon. Their finances are so messed up, criminal indictments may be forthcoming. They nearly got evicted from their headquarters. They're having trouble fundraising. They are deeply in debt and likely not paying employees. They passed the smallest bonding bill in history.

Generally, they failed to do their jobs.

But not if your a RWNJ blogger.

10. Alternative teacher licensure.

9. Keeping no new taxes promise to constituents.

8. Downsizing government, Part I Keith Downey's 15 X 15 legislation.

7. Downsizing government, Part II King Banaian's Sunset Advisory Commission.

6. Balancing budget without increasing taxes.

5. Creating surplus without raising taxes.

4. Passing real health care reform.

3. Passing budget reform.

2. Passing permitting reforms.

1. Creating jobs with the right policies and right priorities.

No explanations. No justifications (and many of these need them).
How come they didn't list vote suppression? The Voter ID amendment will eliminate several much-hated-by-Republicans things like same-day registration, absentee balloting and repress DFL-leaning voting demographics like students and minorities.

What about the stadium? Oh, wait. That raised taxes on Minneapolis residents. Nope. Don't talk about that.

9. No new taxes is a bald-faced lie. Property taxes are going to get jacked up yet again because the MNGOP slashed Local Government Aid (LGA) again. Local governments will have to raise property taxes to pay for things like police, fire and road repair.

6. They didn't balance any budgets and they raised taxes.

5. Creating a surplus is another lie. They had a surplus because they stole money they'd promised our school. Except they called it a "shift."

4. Passing real health care reform. WTF? I have no idea what this RWNJ is talking about. There's no explanation, so you're guess is as good as mine.

And finally ... Drum roll, please ...

1. AND OF COURSE THEY FAILED TO CREATE MANY JOBS!!! They passed the smallest bonding bill in the history of MN.

For example, newly annointed Senate Majority Leader Dave Senjem couldn't even help out his own city of Rochester redevelop the Mayo Civic Center. He couldn't get his fellow Republicans to add this to the bonding bill. It would of created loads of constructions jobs.

They failed to get their tax cuts for Minnesota's 1%. They believe in Underpants Gnomes Economic Theory. They believe that if we give tax breaks to rich people, jobs are magically created.

House Intelligence Committee Chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) condemned Rep. Michele Bachmann's (R-MN) Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy and her personal attack on Huma Abedin. He's kind of forced to do this as her attack was so scurrilous and was against a well-connected and well-liked person.

That kind of assertion certainly doesn't comport with the Intelligence Committee, and I can say that on the record. I have no information in my committee that would indicate that Huma is anything other than an American patriot.

This was not an activity that was sanctioned as any intelligence committee matter.

There are expectations about how someone ought to behave when they have access to the kind of information that someone on the Intelligence Committee has access to. Do Republicans really want someone as unstable as Bachmann on this Committee?

They certainly don't want her in leadership despite her seniority and power. They know how she operates and have shown their disapproval.

But Rogers also distances himself and his Committee from her Degrees-from-Kevin-Bacon-style guilt by association smear campaign. Why?

First, because he doesn't want his name tarnished by her McCarthyism. And, secondly, because he doesn't want to face any possible calls to remove him from his leadership post for aiding and abetting Bachmann's McCarthyism.

While many prominent Republicans have condemned Rep. Michele Bachmann for her Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theory and the personal attack on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's aide Huma Abedin, she does have her defenders. At the ultra right American Thinker, they urged everyone to consider the merits of the questions she asks and lambast the Republicans for ganging up on her instead of defending her:

The latest skirmish in the growing war within the GOP began when John McCain took to the Senate floor last week to lecture Michele Bachmann and other GOP Representatives about their letters to various federal officials regarding Muslim Brotherhood influence within the U.S. government. (See also: Obama Administration Draws Closer to Egypt's Moslem Brotherhood.)

McCain was followed by a predictable limbo line -- how low can you go? -- of Republican bigwigs, elected and unelected, most of them singling out Bachmann for mockery after she had the temerity to suggest that some of America's enemies might be trying to infiltrate the government in order to affect foreign policy decisions.  (Imagine that!)

It's interesting that the RWNJ who wrote this post emphasizes that this is part of a "growing war within the GOP." Doesn't McCain and et al know that McCarthyism is a legitimate political strategy that the GOP ought to follow whenever possible? I mean ... gosh.

Consider the possibility that because Bachmann sits on the House Intelligence Committee that she has super secret knowledge that nobody else knows and she's right? Aren't you scared, yet?

Another RWNJ proves that John McCain was wrong to criticize Bachmann because a guy not named Frank Gaffney (who is in the news so much these days and in such a negative way) says so:

But terrorism expert Walid Shoebat, a former member of the Palestine Liberation Organization who now runs the Walid Shoebat Foundation, insists that McCain is the one who is misinformed.

"The official OCIS (Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies) annual report of the board of trustees from the official government of Great Britain has Huma Abedin's brother participating with the notorious Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual head and the international liaison of the Muslim Brotherhood," Shoebat notes. "This is a known enemy of the United States."

He says Bachmann was on target in pointing out how radical Islamic groups cajoled the FBI into purging information about radical Islam from its training material.

Who is Walid Shoebat? He's says stuff this crazy:

During the panel, Shoebat advocated entering Arab countries and converting Muslims to Christianity. He also went on a rant about how Muslims in meat packaging plants are contaminating America's food supply because their hands are unclean.

And is generally regarded outside of the ultra far right Islamophobia crowd as a fraud who markets himself as an ex-terrorist.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has repeatedly embarrassed herself and the state of Minnesota. You'd think we'd be used to her utter disregard for the truth by now. But she has taken her latest conspiracy theory that the Muslim Brotherhood has "deep penetration" (her sexual imagery, not mine) into the US government one step too far.

Republicans like Sen. John McCain, Sen. Lindsay Graham, Sen. Scott Brown, House Majority Leader John Boehner and Rep. Jeff Flake have condemned her attack on Hillary Clinton's aide. House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Rogers was angry. Her former presidential campaign manager Ed Rollins labeled her accusations "extreme and outrageous."

I imagine that more Republicans will follow suit as I cannot see Bachmann backing down from this fight.

But now that she's facing criticism over her conspiracy theory, she's doubling down. Specifically, Rep. Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) wanted evidence not fact-free allegations. So Bachmann is attacking Ellison.

Bachmann hasn't backed down from claims that a top administration aide has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, even after GOP House Speaker John Boehner and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle condemnedher for making the suggestion. Bachmann instead has turned her fire on Ellison.

Ellison "has a long record of being associated... with the Muslim Brotherhood," Bachmann said on Glenn Beck's radio program on Thursday morning. Listen

Bachmann also told Beck that Ellison wanted to "shut down" her proposed investigation into the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood on the federal government.

(MPR)

Just like her attack on Huma Abedin, Clinton's aide and wife of former Rep. Anthony Wiener (a pro-Israeli Jew, BTW), her attack on Ellison is utterly without merit.

She has now passed any threshold of decency, honesty, and political gamesmanship into a realm that only Joe McCarthy dared to tred. McCarthy at least had the decency to resign when his house of cards collapsed.

Public officials have a responsibility to be aware that their words have consequences. Public officials cannot accuse other public officials of sedition without evidence.

Bachmann has never had any trace of decency. There is no argument, no talking point and no conspiracy that she wouldn't push. There is no threshold to how low she is willing to go.

She needs to finally accept responsibility for her actions. She needs accept that she has gone too far this time.

She needs to resign.

Yesterday, the City of Minneapolis released a report on the effects of the Republican's Voter ID constitutional amendment. Unlike Ramsey County's analysis, they weren't willing to make any guesses about how much it would cost to implement. The reason is there are just too many unknowns.

Any analysis of Minnesota's proposed amendment is speculative at this point due to the vague ballot language and the need for more precise implementation, funding, and operational regulations. As a result, this report is not intended to be comprehensive but rather it seeks to outline the potential impacts to the City of Minneapolis and its voters, should the amendment be adopted.

They estimate Voter ID would affect 215,000 voters statewide. They also state that these 215K people would have to cover the expenses related obtaining the necessary documents to get a government issued ID. So Minneapolis election officials do not agree with Republicans that obtaining a "free" Government ID would actually be free.

In the report they assess the impact of the following:

1. implementing provisional balloting. This would replace our current system of same-day registration and absentee balloting.
2. Eliminating same-day registration.
3. Eliminating absentee voting.
4. Eliminating absentee voting for military personnel stationed outside of MN.
5. Implementing Voter ID for the 2013 election.
6. Educating Minneapolis residents about the new Voter ID law for the 2013 election.

1. Provisional balloting

A provisional ballot is filled out but is not counted on Election Day. When voters cast provisional ballots they must be allowed to return to the polling location or the election headquarters to verify their identity. The length of time allowed for voters to return and verify their identity varies from state to state but generally it appears that the verification can happen between four and twenty days. As a result, additional staff time must be allotted during that time to certify the provisional ballots of those provisional voters.

According to a 2009 survey, 30 percent of provisional ballots nationwide are never counted.11 Minnesota does not currently have provisional balloting. Consequently, state and local government agencies would need to absorb startup costs as well as ongoing operational costs.

But their conclusions that many to most people who cast provisional ballots never return and turn their provisional ballot into an actual vote is shocking!

Oftentimes, news organizations declare an unofficial winner on the night of the election. It is conceivable that provisional voters may choose not to complete the steps required to verify their identity following an election-which would be required to have their vote counted-especially if they believe the outcome has already been decided. Ultimately, this could lead to a lower number of votes being counted. At the extreme, it could lead to further voter apathy and disengagement.

2. Elimination of same-day registration

The document how state's that have same-day registration always lead the nation in voter turnout. I have made the assertion that the sole reason for pushing this Voter ID constitutional amendment is to eliminate same-day registration. With lower voter turnout, Republicans always do better.

Studies have demonstrated that Same Day Registration supports increased voter turnout. In fact, in those states that allowed Same Day Registration prior to 2006 (which included North Dakota, which has no voter registration requirements), voter turnout is 10 to 17 percent higher than the national average. In Minnesota, it is estimated that Election Day registrations account for between 5 and 10 percent of the total voter turnout and participation statistics.

Furthermore, they report that states with same-day registration do no have to purge data. In other words, corrupt Republicans like Florida Governor Rick Scott cannot shamelessly attempt to eliminate Democratic-leaning demographic groups from the states voter database to help Republicans chances in the upcoming election.

Critics of same-day registration point to the potential of vote fraud. They cannot cite examples as there isn't any, but its their justification as to why we need to eliminate same day registration. The report debunks their claims:

Critics claim that Same Day Registration practices present opportunities for voter fraud. However, election officials from those states which authorize Same Day Registration (and North Dakota) have pointed out that safeguards are in place to prevent any increase in fraudulent activity in comparison to other states. Some of these safeguards include:

Requiring some additional level of identification, such as a utility bill, to verify the person's address;

Segregating SDR ballots and refraining from counting those ballots until verification certificates have been sent out and undeliverable ones are returned;

Restricting the overall number of sites at which voters can register on Election Day;

Implementing minimum residency requirements; and

Stating and enforcing a deterrent penalty for fraud.

3. Elimination of absentee voting

Their assessment says it all. They have no idea because the 2013 legislature will have to specify how to deal with this.

According to the proposed amendment, "all voters, including those not voting in person, must be subject to substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification prior to a ballot being cast or counted." This substantially equivalent standard could be extremely challenging to satisfy for voters opting to participate under the absentee voting process currently allowed in Minnesota. Because the proposed constitutional amendment lacks specificity on standards for substantially equivalent, it is impossible to predict how the Legislature may choose to address the legitimate voting needs of those who are unable to participate on Election Day at the designated polling place.

[my emphasis]

4. Eliminating absentee voting for military personnel stationed outside of MN

Republicans talk a big game when it comes to our veterans but have a long history of reducing benefits, cutting funding to the VA, restricting the definiition of PTSD so that few can receive help and sending our troops into combat with inferior body armor and substandard armor in their vehicles.

This Voter ID constitutional amendment is no different. It fails to address how military personnel outside of Minnesota would be guaranteed their right to vote.  The report states that the elimination of absentee voting would have a huge impact.

This is especially a crucial point for the number of military voters deployed to locations away from their homes-whether elsewhere in the nation or outside the United States. Without clear definitions and standards to prescribe how absentee voters would be served under the proposed constitutional amendment, it is possible that the entire practice of absentee voting could be called into question.

5. Implementing Voter ID for the 2013 election

Minneapolis holds its election for City Council, Park Board and other minor city offices in 2013. Election officials might not know how to implement the new provisions of VoterID until May of 2013. They might have as little as 5 months to implement. This is not a reasonable amount of time.

Assuming the amendment is adopted, the State Legislature would need to adopt standards and provide specific direction on the implementation of the new identification requirements as well as other aspects impacted, such as absentee voting. New rules would need to be drafted, debated, and adopted in final form by both houses of the Legislative during its 2013 Session. When the Legislature is able to reach agreement on the scope of these new rules and regulations, the Governor must then sign them into law. It is likely that the interpretation and implementation of these new rules and regulations would be subject to the administrative oversight of the Secretary of State (Minnesota's chief elections official), which could necessitate additional time to develop, test, and deploy to all counties. Thereafter, training on the new identification requirements needs to take place at the local level to assure that municipal clerks and election judges conform to the new requirements.

Then there's this little factoid about how complex voting reform actually is:

The last major election reform in Minnesota, which focused on absentee balloting, involved a two-year implementation period. The fact that this proposed amendment would provide a fraction of that time to absorb, adjust, and accommodate to major election process reform is cause for extreme concern among local election officials.

6. Educating Minneapolis residents about the new Voter ID law for the 2013 election

Minneapolis would like have a mere 5 months to educate all its citizens about the new Voter ID law. To avoid an expensive lawsuit, they would need to spend significant amounts of money to do it right.

Before implementing a new photo ID regime, Minnesota will need to conduct an aggressive outreach and education campaign to assure that voters understand the new identification requirements-particularly those voters who may not have the government-issued ID and may need additional time before an election to take the steps necessary to obtain that mandated form of identification.13 Given the breadth of changes potentially required under this amendment, it is reasonable to conclude that the scope of such an educational campaign would be far-reaching and would entail significant expenditures of state (and quite possibly local) revenue.

They claim that any education effort must include:

... a minimum educational campaign in Minnesota could be expected to include: mailings to all citizens informing them of new ID requirements and how to obtain a voter ID; production of radio and television public service announcements; purchase of airtime to broadcast these public service announcements using media outlets and during hours deemed to reach large portions of the population; purchase of advertising space in various newspapers with high circulation numbers to advertise new voter ID requirements; and the creation of website(s) to publicize new voter ID requirements. While these efforts-and the associated costs-to educate voters may start with the State of Minnesota, it is reasonable to conclude that local governments would likely bear a portion (even a substantial portion) of these costs and the responsibility for planning, organizing, and conducting various outreach and educational aspects of a statewide coordinated campaign.

Alliance for a Better Minnesota released a video about how the 2010 Tea Party first-termers did in the legislature. Considering they played large parts in shutting down the legislature, passing far right agenda item after far right agenda item, I guess it depends upon whose side your on?

If you on the side of the people of Minnesota, you'll probably agree that this little emo-pop ditty from the 90s accurately sums up these clowns and their first (and hopefully last) term in office:

Up until recently, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has been granted a free pass on all her crazed conspiracy theories, lies, stretching the truth, bigotry, fear-mongering and occasional insane behavior by Minnesota journalists.

When she was a rising political figure in the Minnesota State Senate, nobody in the Minnesota media forced her to answer any questions when she said that gay marriage would lead to our schools teaching kids to become homosexuals.

The only time I can recall any Minnesota journalist asking her any tough questions was after she claimed knowledge of secret Iranian plans to divide up Iraq. But the journalists dropped it when she stonewalled them.

Days before the 2008 election, she asked for in investigation into members of Congress who held Anti-American views. The only consequence was her opponent got $1M. She still won reelection comfortably.

She urged people to not participate in the 2010 census which is a crime and faced no consequences.

She claimed that Virginia has enough oil off its coast to replace the oil we import from Saudi Arabia and Minnesota journalists ignored it.

She recently claimed that Democrats will do anything to steal the 2012 election and nobody in the Minnesota media paid attention. Nobody asked her to produce any proof of her claim.

But now claiming the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated our government and personally attacking an aide to Hillary Clinton is the one conspiracy theory too far? Is it because she wrote official letters requesting investigations instead of just telling Chris Matthews? Is it because she's run for President and gained the national spotlight?

Since Minnesota's media won't cover her adequately (or at all), is it because the national media is finally paying attention to her that she may finally face consequences for her utter disregard for the truth and her shameless fear-mongering?

Or will she face any real consequences?

Joe McCarthy resigned after it became clear that he was simply fear-mongering. But Bachmann has been busted so many times for fear-mongering it's ridiculous. The NY Times, MSNBC, CNN and et al have pointed her lies so often it would take me a week researching just to find all the instances.

Embarrassing herself and Minnesota doesn't phase her. Remember when she groped President Bush?

Joe McCarthy eventually felt ashamed for his fear-mongering and resigned from the US Senate. Bachmann is so detached from reality, has gotten away with it for so long (since day one, actually) that I can't see her quitting under any circumstance.

TwoPuttTommy has been documenting the Cooked Books scandal of the Republican Party of Minnesota. Their rampant corruption and incompetence is staggering.

City Pages hints at it, but I'll just ask the question: Is the MNGOP a political party or a criminal conspiracy?

It just keeps getting worse for the MNGOP.

During a news conference this morning, Common Cause Executive Director Mike Dean announced his watchdog organization is filing criminal complaints against the MNGOP and former chairman Tony Sutton for allegedly soliciting and accepting an illegal contribution from Count Them All Properly, a then for-profit corporation that Sutton and other state Republican leaders founded in December 2010 to help pay down recount debt.

If a St. Paul city prosecutor brings charges against Sutton, he could face five years in prison and a $20,000 fine. The allegations against the MNGOP would have to be taken up by a Ramsey County prosecutor, but if penalized to the fullest extent of the law the MNGOP could be dissolved.