Dear Mrs. Bachmann

Oh. Honey. No.

My favorite congressperson is at it again. Michele is feeling out of place in the new Washington, almost like a “foreign correspondent on enemy lines” on the issue of climate change and government ideas for dealing with it. She is encouraging her constituents to get "armed and dangerous" to fight it:

I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us, having a revolution every now and then is a good thing, and the people — we the people — are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country. And I think this has the potential of changing the dynamic of freedom forever in the United States.
Commenters at the Minnesota Independent point out that this might not be legal.

For a member of Congress to urge armed resistance against lawful actions of the US government crosses the line. Her speech is sedition, and (according to section 2383 of title 18 of the US Code), she is not only subject to being locked up for ten years, but she is “incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

On the other hand - go for it. :tongue:


relax, it's just a figure of speech.

no one would take that advice seriously and become armed and dangerous.

and shoot a politician in the melon.
 
met·a·phorNoun/ˈmetəˌfôr/
1. A figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
2. A thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, esp. something abstract. More »
Wikipedia - Dictionary.com - Answers.com - Merriam-Webster

Hope that clears things up for ya, You're welcome.

So...the whole "bringing a gun to a knife fight" thing never really bothered you at all in reality.

no, it's more the hypocrisy of pretending to be shocked when the other side uses the same language that tends to irk me.

you were saying?
 
met·a·phorNoun/ˈmetəˌfôr/
1. A figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
2. A thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, esp. something abstract. More »
Wikipedia - Dictionary.com - Answers.com - Merriam-Webster

Hope that clears things up for ya, You're welcome.

Batcrazy

1. A female congressman from Tundraland
2. A Digbat
3. Advocate for National Default
 
A major poltical figure making a treasonous statement is cetainly worthy of a thread on this message board. It deserves a lot more attention than that.

It is a huge ASSUMPTION to say that Bachmann meant that statement metaphorically. She said what she said. She could have stated that she was speaking metaphoically, but she did not.

This is the second time recently that Bachmann's words have to be taken figuratively or reinterperted. The first was her response to the wifely submission question.

Bachmann speaks english and is capable of expressing herself - she a freaking lawyer!. Why should these comments be taken at other than face value?

Also, has anyone noticed the huge increase in personal attacks by the wingnuts on this board lately? It seems that when they can't come up with a solid argument - they take the Loooooow road!
 
I don't need to formulate an argument to know that BDBoop is the stupidest bitch on this forum. Even if she posts a thread that has merit she wouldn't know the difference. It's all hate to her. Sad thing is she can't even form her own opinions. It's all spoon fed to her like a jar of gerber baby food. She seems to have the analytical skills of a 7th grader.

So yea, its personal and as far as I'm concerned she deserves it. If you don't.....well Fuck you too.
 
Bachmann speaks english and is capable of expressing herself - she a freaking lawyer!. Why should these comments be taken at other than face value?

OMg, because she's a lawyer that means YOU ALL CAN'T figure out what she is saying and twist and turn it into some stupid shit.

Did you all go all hystrical when Obama said bring a knife to a gunfight?

Or when he said, I want you to get in their faces?

give us all a break, we aren't all as hysterically stupid as some of you seem to be. Just like that crap with cross hairs, I've NEVER seen such dumb stuff in all my life. but you all ran with it..I was ashamed for most of you.
 
Last edited:
A major poltical figure making a treasonous statement is cetainly worthy of a thread on this message board. It deserves a lot more attention than that.

It is a huge ASSUMPTION to say that Bachmann meant that statement metaphorically. She said what she said. She could have stated that she was speaking metaphoically, but she did not.

This is the second time recently that Bachmann's words have to be taken figuratively or reinterperted. The first was her response to the wifely submission question.

Bachmann speaks english and is capable of expressing herself - she a freaking lawyer!. Why should these comments be taken at other than face value?

Also, has anyone noticed the huge increase in personal attacks by the wingnuts on this board lately? It seems that when they can't come up with a solid argument - they take the Loooooow road!

some of us don't breathe exclusively through our mouths.

give it a try!

:thup:
 
Yeah, really another great WORTHLESS THREAD there Booper.taken from thinkprogress and some rag called Minnesota Independent...REAL GREAT:lol:
 
Last edited:
A major poltical figure making a treasonous statement is cetainly worthy of a thread on this message board. It deserves a lot more attention than that.

It is a huge ASSUMPTION to say that Bachmann meant that statement metaphorically. She said what she said. She could have stated that she was speaking metaphoically, but she did not.

This is the second time recently that Bachmann's words have to be taken figuratively or reinterperted. The first was her response to the wifely submission question.

Bachmann speaks english and is capable of expressing herself - she a freaking lawyer!. Why should these comments be taken at other than face value?

Also, has anyone noticed the huge increase in personal attacks by the wingnuts on this board lately? It seems that when they can't come up with a solid argument - they take the Loooooow road!

"treasonous statement"..???

:lol:

Srsly???

:lol:
 
Bachmann: Americans fear 'rise of Soviet Union'

The Soviet Union broke up into 15 separate republics 20 years ago. Boris Yeltsin was the first freely elected leader of Russia, the largest of those republics.

"What people recognize is that there's a fear that the United States is in an unstoppable decline. They see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union and our loss militarily going forward," Bachmann said on Jay Sekulow's radio show.

Bachmann, a Minnesota congresswoman, was trying to explain that Americans are concerned about issues beyond federal spending and the debt.

Shit!! We do?! Dammit, I did NOT get the memo!!
 
Bachmann: Americans fear 'rise of Soviet Union'

The Soviet Union broke up into 15 separate republics 20 years ago. Boris Yeltsin was the first freely elected leader of Russia, the largest of those republics.

"What people recognize is that there's a fear that the United States is in an unstoppable decline. They see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union and our loss militarily going forward," Bachmann said on Jay Sekulow's radio show.

Bachmann, a Minnesota congresswoman, was trying to explain that Americans are concerned about issues beyond federal spending and the debt.

Shit!! We do?! Dammit, I did NOT get the memo!!

If it wasn't for China, you wouldn't be able to pay your bills!
Ungrateful woman!

Is there still a Soviet Union?
 
Isn't it time for bed for kids going to school?

oh well, you all have at it. I'm bored as usual with the boopers petty threads.

see ya, good luck
 

Forum List

Back
Top