#We cain't wait

Hey Finn, would you answer my very direct and simple question, please?

Yes; he is pretty unpopular.





David

Hey snood...I thought I did.

Apparently I never got around to hitting the Reply button.

Let me see if I can reconstruct my very direct and simple response for you:

Yes

She's not my first choice among the current crop of candidates, but neither is she my last (that would be Ron Paul).

She's certainly not crazy, as she is so often called by her detractors, but she is intelligent, has integrity and I agree with many, many more of her policy positions than Obama's.

I don't believe any of the nutty notions about Obama being an Islamist sleeper agent, and I'm happy to believe he's a natural born citizen. I don't think he hates America or is trying to destroy it.

I also don't believe he was qualified for the office when he won it and I don't think that he has, at all, grown into the job.

I think he is as owned by Labor Unions as any president has ever been owned by Big Business, and while he has a core disdain for business, he is all too happy to court their donations and engage in crony capitalism. His economic policies and Obamacare will ruin the nation if they are not soon reversed.

He has overseen a loading of the federal government by left-wing ideologues at all levels that if given another four years may prove to be his most significant legacy in terms of practical effect.

I give him credit for increasing drone attacks on al-Qaida leaders, and for sending the Seals in after bin-Laden. I also give him some credit for an initial increase in the deportation of illegal aliens. I'm sure there are a handful of under publicized programs or policy decisions that I might support, but none spring to mind.

He is a narcissist who prefers sycophants to objective advisors, and while he has spent most of his first term in campaign mode he is an inept politician who hasn't developed any of personal relationships needed to get things done in this country and the world.

I don't know enough detail about the terms of each of our past presidents to say that Obama is the worst we've ever had, but he's the worst in my lifetime and I was born in 1954. I didn't think I would see a worse president than Richard Nixon or Jimmy Carter, but I have.

I could go on, but I'm sure you get my drift. For me, a vote for Bachmann is far more a vote against Obama than a vote for the congresswoman.

I was trying to determine whether you were more dishonest, or crazy.

Did you answer the other question about whether or not you would tell the civil rights marchers of the 6o's to go home because there might be violence?

Since you've just revealed that this question was asked in bad faith, why would I bother to answer any other question you might pose?

"Bad faith" coming from you, someone who has proven to be intellectually dishonest (or crazy, or both) sort of has no meaning. So the way I look at it is, why wouldn't you?

Anyone who says Michelle Bachmann would be a better president than Barack Obama, and is not joking, has something wrong in their heads.

The way I look at it is just the way I previously wrote, but maybe you don't understand "bad faith." Try looking it up.

How have I proven to be either intellectually dishonest or crazy snood?

Wait...now I get it! I don't agree with you and therefore I must be either intellectually dishonest or crazy.

Let me give your debating technique a try:

Anyone who say Barack Obama has been a good president, and is not joking, has something wrong in their heads.

Pretty dull, but if that's the sort of exchange you're looking for, I'll comply this time.

Maybe you need to look up "disingenuous", but I think it's more likely that what you and others on the right who see Bachman as a reasonable, serious politician suffer from is such a severe cognitive dissonance that they're actually insane. Comparing Obama and Bachman to me is like comparing William Buckley to Keith Olbermann. How can anyone see you doing that and believe that you're weighing things evenly?

Bachmann won the Minnesota 6th congressional district in 2006 with 151,258 or 51% (a 3rd party candidate picked up 7.8%)

In 2008 she won the election with 187,817 votes or 46.4% (a 3rd party candidate picked up 10%)

In 2010 she won the election with 159,476 votes or 52.5% (The same 3rd party candidate ran along with a 4th Independent candidate)

Obviously she didn't run again Obama in these races but she was hammered as too extreme by her Democratic opponent in 2010.

Since 1949 the district has more or less flip flopped between electing Republicans and Democratic-Farmer-Labor candidates.

It is a 95% white district with a median income of 57,000

Bachman served as a Minnesota State Senator from 2000 through 2004

Bachmann graduated from Winona State University with a BA and received a JD from Oral Roberts University. In 1988, Bachmann received an LL.M. degree in tax law from the William & Mary School of Law.

She worked as an attorney for the IRS from 1988 to 1993

She and her husband own a counseling practice Bachmann & Associates

Obama, as you know, graduated from Columbia University and received his JD from Harvard.

He was a Community Organizer before earning his degree and worked as a civil rights attorney in Chicago and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004

He served three terms as an Illinois State Senator from 1997 to 2004

He was elected to the US Senate in 2004 and served a little more that 2 years of his 6 year term before launching his ultimate successful campaign for the presidency in Feb 2007

I don't know what their respective records of performance were during their university days, but in terms of school prestige the nod goes to Obama...although ORU is hardly an online institution and William & Mary is quite prestigious.

Obama has a JD, but Bachmann has her LL.M and a longer record of actually practicing law. If I wanted someone to write a paper on constitutional law I would hire Obama. If I needed representation in litigation with the IRS I would hire Bachmann.

Bachmann has experience running a business; Obama has none.

Their public service experience, prior to Obama winning the presidency, is roughly comparable, with Bachmann serving more years at the federal level.

We can go deeper and compare their records as State Senators. That might be tough though considering Obama's state legislative records are somehow missing.

We can go deeper and try and compare their records as practicing attorneys, but that could be tough since Obama refused to reveal who his clients were during the time he spent in private practice.

Based on current polling, in all likelihood, Obama would beat Bachmann, but let's assume she runs and does no better than Alf Landon who in 1936 suffered the most lop sided defeat in presidential history. Landon secured 36.5% of the popular vote, and 129,391,711 votes were cast in the 2008 election; so based on these numbers Bachmann would receive something like 47.2 million votes

So I guess it's a given that there are crazy voters in the suburbs North of St Paul, but what's that? 150,000 crazy people? Big deal, they're isolated. Must be scary though that there could be almost 50 million crazies in America.

Your arrogance on this issue reminds me of the apocryphal quote attributed to Pauline Kael of the NY Times:



However I'm even more reminded of the quote which The New Yorker claims is what Kael actually said: