Tag Archives: Michele Bachmann

Partisan Heartbreaker Tom the Petty

Originally posted at BIG Hollywood

In an effort to further promote the message of love, peace and the type of compassion intrinsic to all dedicated liberals, Alec Baldwin, a paunchy comedian with anger issues, called attention to what he feels is Michele Bachmann’s inability to articulate by inarticulately spewing obscenities in the Minnesota congresswoman’s direction by way of Twitter.

Within seconds of Michele announcing she’d decided to launch a bid for the Republican nomination for President of the United States, it became clear that not one iota of liberal negativity toward conservatives has abated.

Over the past few days, the rock world has joined the fun by publicly stepping forward in an effort to send a message to the latest object of targeted political ridicule, Michele Bachmann. The goal is to drive home the point that liberal rock musicians disapprove of both Bachmann’s politics and audacity in thinking she actually has a chance to send honorary rock star Barack Obama back to Chicago.

Following Alec Baldwin’s Twitter tirade, Tom Petty, a Mad Hatter in sunglasses, decided it was his turn to deny Bachmann, without explanation, the use of one of his hit songs. Petty is so anti-GOP he forbade Michele Bachmann from playing  “American Girl” as a musical backdrop to her announcement to run for president.

Apparently, the last thing Tom Petty wants to be associated with is writing the signature anthem that could accompany a female Republican candidate on the trip from Minnesota to the White House.  So, to prevent that from happening, the rocker sent a three-word message to Michele: “Cease and desist.”

It’s doubtful that Tom Petty would decline $275 per person ticket proceeds based on who concertgoers supported in the last election. Yet, rock musicians who refuse, due to partisan politics, to let conservative candidates use songs for campaign backdrops forget that many of their fans are conservatives.

It’s no secret; Tom Petty isn’t a fan of the Right. When George W. Bush ran for governor of Texas, the genial GW pulled a Michele Bachmann and complimented the songwriter by using “I Won’t Back Down” as a campaign song. The unappreciative Petty had his publisher warn the campaign that using the ballad could send a false impression (Heaven forbid) that Petty endorsed Bush, and ordered the gubernatorial team to pull the song.

Tom Petty is one of a large herd of liberal singers and songwriters who sell their wares like capitalists on steroids to anyone and everyone, but when a conservative candidate identifies with one of their songs, out of fear of being perceived as leaning to the right hawkers of concert T-shirts and tacky glassware suddenly become all partisan and possessive.

Yet when Democrats like Black Socks Spitzer of New York and John ‘My-Wife-Has-Cancer-While-I’m-Having-an-Affair’ Edwards used Heartbreaker music as campaign anthems, Tom the Perpetually Petty fully endorsed both Lotharios using the extremely apropos “Won’t Back Down” ditty.

The “You Can Call Me Al” and “Don’t Stop” crews are proud to have signature songs associated with Al ‘Crazed  Sex Poodle’ Gore and impeached adulterer Bill Clinton, but Sarah Palin shaking hands and hugging babies in time to “Barracuda” irked female rock group Heart so much the duo threatened a lawsuit if Sarah didn’t pick another tune.

Truth is, in the world of rock and roll, the liberal malady is endemic. In the 1980’s Bruce Springsteen took on the Gipper over Reagan’s use of the song “Born in the USA.” During the 2004 presidential election, in an effort to save the USA from a second Bush term, Bruce partnered with über-liberal left-wing group MoveOn.org to headline a star-studded caravan of whiners in a Vote for Change Tour.

The 2004 MoveOn.org/rock-and-roll effort failed and Bush won reelection, which proves there are more Republican voters than liberals realize.  If, as a group, conservatives boycotted downloading music from iTunes and stopped buying concert tickets, many artists who feel comfortable insulting Republicans for sport would definitely take a hit in the pocketbook.

Then again, one has to wonder if someone like Bruce Springsteen even comprehends the concept that the people he slurs with his political invectives have the monetary power to affect The Boss’s bottom line.  After all, didn’t Springsteen say Obama “speaks to the America I’ve envisioned in my music for the past 35 years?”

Even still, the liberal Step Away From the Song list goes on and on: Pretty boy Jon Bon Jovi told Sarah Palin not to use “Who Says You Can’t Go Home.”  The Foo Fighters and Van Halen dissed John McCain; Bruce Hornsby felt Sean Hannity’s use of his song “The Way it Is” shouldn’t be the way it is; and rock group Rush informed Rand Paul he’s no “Tom Sawyer.”

By now, Republicans should know better than to provide ammunition for the left by failing to stringently follow copyright laws and respect property ownership rights. Yet, a politically partisan situation still presents an opportunity to learn a profound lesson for those on both sides of the political aisle.

Liberal musicians should understand that having a fan base largely made up of those without the ability to pay $1.99 to download a song or lay out close to three bills for a concert ticket isn’t going to ensure their rock star lifestyle for very long.

For those heartbroken by Petty Heartbreaker, conservatives must take their eyes off the “Yes We Can” free-for-all where liberal politicians sway and wave in time to music amidst showers of balloons filled to capacity with Democrat hot air.  It’s time to realize the same standard does not and will never apply to Grand Ole or Tea Party candidates. Just because liberal musicians become gazillionaires with the help of Republican fans doesn’t mean those same rich rock stars will show appreciation by treating conservative candidates with respect.

For those on the right, the salient point is this: liberal politicians are never denied rights to artists’ theme songs; quite the contrary, they are encouraged to use them. Conservatives politicians should not be so naïve as to assume similar rules apply to the likes of Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann.

With that in mind, Bachmann and Harley-riding Barracuda Palin should rethink forgoing the mud wrestling fight Michele claims the media is itching for and hit the ring to work out which lady will seek permission to claim Carrie Underwood’s “All-American Girl” and whose anthem will ultimately be conservative rocker Kid Rock’s “Born Free.”

 

Questioning Michele Bachmann’s Foster Parent Claims

Originally posted at American Thinker

In order to understand liberalism, all one needs to do is take note of what the left applauds versus what they attack.  Case in point: Minnesota congresswoman Michele Bachmann – wife, mother to five biological children and foster mother to 23 teenagers – has now become the focal point of left-wing attacks as they prepare to diminish her stature by attacking her family.

Michele gave a stellar performance at the Republican debate.  It was in that forum that she announced her decision to “seek the office of the presidency of the United States of America.”  The only woman on the platform, Michele voiced strong convictions, attacked government regulation, called the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill “over-the-top,” and promised if elected to repeal Obamacare.  Michele praised the Tea Party and described it as a “wide swath of America coming together…to take the country back.”

Yet, despite articulating strong opinions on varied subjects, Michele’s gutsy and possibly prophetic proclamation that Barack Obama is a “one-term” president wasn’t nearly as courageous as a pro-life statement she made with unabashed personal conviction and commitment to truth.

What could be worse for pro-choice America than a woman with a brood of children, smiling and firmly proclaiming without obfuscation, wavering, or uncertainty the following belief: “I am 100 percent pro-life. I’ve given birth to five babies, and I’ve taken 23 foster children into my home. I believe in the dignity of life from conception until natural death. I believe in the sanctity of human life.”

Michele Bachmann bore five biological children and didn’t stop there – she and husband Marcus welcomed into their home the at-risk offspring of other mothers who also chose to grant their babies the gift of life.  Not only that, but the Minnesota congresswoman also shared her commitment to the “dignity of life from conception until natural death,” which is a view that – especially on the cusp of Obamacare, the costs of which are sure to run over budget – is not only ill-timed, but most assuredly unappreciated.

Moreover, Bachmann openly proclaimed as “sacred” and “holy” something which, after almost 40 years of unrelenting indoctrination, many Americans have now come to accept as a clump of cells – another statement sure to be considered unconscionable in pro-choice circles.

Michele placed a target squarely on her own back when she dared to tie the right to life to the Declaration of Independence, demoted government from bestowing “inalienable” rights, mentioned the Creator, and emphatically declared “only God can give [life] and only God” should take it away.

In conclusion, Mrs. Bachmann even managed to inject sanity into the conversation when she noted that 2% of rape/incest abortions “get all the attention” while 98% of convenience-based abortion is “where the real battle” lies in the fight against the unfettered slaughter of the unborn.

As it turned out, the Republican debate provided a public forum for a conservative woman to school enlightened society on what many believe to be the reproductive attitudes of a troglodyte. If Mrs. Bachmann continues to voice such extreme opinions, she will fast become as distasteful to liberals as Sarah Palin, the pro-life mother of a Downs Syndrome son, whose presence and principles – especially when toting around what the world deems less-than-perfect offspring – have made her an object of unrelenting mockery.

For years, Palin has struggled against cruel rumors that Trig, her special needs baby, isn’t her and husband Todd’s son, but rather daughter Bristol’s.

Taking a page from the Demean the Maternal Claims of Pro-Life Women playbook, Michele Bachmann’s motherliness is also now being called into question by those who wish to undermine her foster parenting claim, saying “She makes it sound like she got them at birth and raised them to adulthood, but that’s not true.”

Following the debate at the Republican Leadership Conference, a CBS News reporter broached the foster parent subject with Michele in what appeared to be an effort to coax the Minnesota congresswoman, who claims she “raised” 23 foster children, into admitting she hosted most of the kids for a limited amount of time.

Those who accept “the right to privacy” as the right to destroy innocent life suddenly have become sticklers on the proper definition of the word “raised.”

Although Michele Bachmann has never once implied that she cared for 23 children simultaneously, with grace and poise the congresswoman responded to the inquiry in the following way:

Well in the situation we were in we took children as teenagers. Their family was facing a challenge and they weren’t gonna be able to be at home with their parents and we took them in as teenagers and our job was to see that they graduated from high school and were successfully launched into the world.

Challenged further for precise time frames, Michele, who said she considered having each and every child in her home a “privilege,” calmly expanded her clarification: “It really varied depending on the children and we’ve never got into specifics about the children because we always wanted to observe their privacy and that of their families, as I’m sure you can appreciate.”

It seems that when pro-life women promote motherhood, those who defend abortion as a “privacy” issue feel more than justified in prying into their personal lives if doing so provides a solid platform upon which to falsely portray a female conservative Christian politician as a fraud.

It’s almost certain that Michele Bachmann’s parenting experience wouldn’t be a topic of discussion if instead of “raising” unwanted children, she shared the opinion that women “facing challenges” would be better off exercising their right to choose in an abortion clinic.

And so, the debate over whether Michele Bachmann raised or did not raise foster children proves once again that liberalism exposes its dark underbelly not so much by what it applauds as by what and whom it attempts to tear down.

Weiner the Womanizer

Originally posted at Daily Caller

Anthony Weiner (D-NY), one of the most arrogant, self-impressed individuals ever to occupy an office on Capitol Hill, was caught with his pants down in the truest sense of the word.  When Representative Weiner stepped behind the podium to address his Twitter picture controversy, he looked like he was going to explode from humiliation.  Seeing a person so demoralized caused my kinder, gentler self to actually have a millisecond of pity for the New York congressman.

It was uncomfortable to watch a sniveling, visibly disgraced Weiner admit that he lied about sending lewd pictures of himself to young women.  However, my strange sensation of sympathy quickly dissipated, because the whole sordid skivvy-Twitter incident confirmed what I’ve suspected for a while: Anthony Weiner oozes with contempt toward women, and that contempt manifests itself in many different ways.

Take for instance Kirsten Powers, the Fox News analyst who once dated Anthony Weiner.  Powers called Weiner “very sweet, very funny,” and “very charming.” After three months, Kirsten found out the hard way that Anthony is none of the above. Powers said she was “shocked when [Weiner] broke it off. I think he’s the only guy who ever dumped me!” said Powers.  “I think he probably dumped many girls. I don’t think it was that big of a deal.”

Weiner has prided himself on being a smarmy, imperious, liberal know-it-all that speaks to political adversaries, especially the female ones, in a debasing manner that borders on verbal harassment.

In interviews and press conferences, the pushy, smirking Weiner has rudely tried to set the rules, even calling reporters “jackasses.” The congressman’s body language implies that whomever he’s debating is beneath his exalted self.

For years, Weiner has played Democrat pit bull on Fox News, sparring with America Live host Megyn Kelly. Whenever Ms. Kelly disagrees with Weiner’s rabid liberalism, the congressman attempts to steer the conversation by pummeling the Fox anchor with an assault of interruptions and insulting comments. In one contentious interview, as soon as Megyn gained the upper hand Weiner responded by demeaning her professional skills, telling her, “This is the way interviews work, you ask the questions and then I get to answer.”

On more than one occasion, Weiner has also subjected congressional colleague Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to similar disrespect when debating the debt ceiling, spending, and tax cuts. Seething with condescension, Weiner once attempted to set Bachmann up by mockingly asking her trick questions to try to trap her and make her look foolish.

Now, after years of Anthony Weiner accusing everyone of lying, it is revealed that the self-righteous Democrat congressman broke his marriage vows to wife Huma Abedin, the longtime personal assistant of another woman also humiliated by a sex scandal.

During Weiner’s apologetic press conference, the public found out his indiscretion was probably not a surprise to his wife.  The New York Representative confessed to the press that in an outpouring of soul-mate honesty he had discussed his lack of Twitter decorum with his wife-to-be prior to their wedding. Then after the honeymoon, while Huma was tailing Mrs. Clinton, contemptuous Weiner was tailing attractive young women on Twitter and Facebook.

In fact, when the Weiners married last year, former President Clinton, the king of all womanizers, officiated at the ceremony. Although Bill Clinton doling out wedding blessings is like David Hasselhoff being a guest speaker at an AA meeting, during the Muslim/Jewish ceremony the ex-president did share some prophetic wisdom gleaned from personal experience: “Marrying a politician can be tough because it’s easy to distrust them, whatever their religion.” Amen to that.

Huma should have heeded Bill’s insightful counsel because while she was busy assisting Hillary, Internet security specialist Anthony Weiner was home, snapping suggestive pictures of himself and sending them to 198 women, some of whom may turn out to be teenagers.  Weiner disrespected women who were total strangers by having phone sex with these female “friends” and burning up the social network in an attempt to cultivate self-gratifying cyber- sexual relationships with people he’s never even met in person.

After being busted by Andrew Breitbart, the only journalist brave enough to do the work the left wing media refuses to do, Weiner immediately exhibited additional contempt – this time for the truth, Huma, his constituents, and the public. The disgraced congressman lied not once, but repeatedly, until he was cornered with proof of his salacious escapades – photos, phone records, and a multitude of women stepping forward to tell the story that the congressman, supposedly out of humiliation, refused to admit.

Yet, after all of that, it was at the podium that Weiner’s condescending aggression made itself crystal clear:  After the congressman, in a Jim McGreevy moment, admitted his weakness and that what he did was immoral and hurtful towards his wife, he shifted into his standard conceited operating mode and announced he had no plans to step down – a revelation more shocking than the shot of Weiner in tight boxer briefs.

And so, the most disturbing aspect of this lurid story is not the congressman’s bawdy behavior online, but his insolence toward the American people, toward Congress, and toward the state of New York. Despite his admission of guilt, Weiner’s thorough contempt for women has not vanished; it’s been expanded to include the rest of America.

 

%d bloggers like this: