Don't Expect 2012 GOP Nominee to Echo Bachmann's Attack on Obama
March 7, 2011BEGIN TRANSCRIPTRUSH: Michele Bachmann was on Meet the Press yesterday and it was interesting. She decided she had some things to say regardless what the questions were. In fact, it was a lesson in how Republicans ought to behave on these programs rather than accept the premise, and in this case the host David Gregory puts forward, you go on the show, you have something to say, say it regardless what the questions are. In this case she was trying to sound a warning. This is the second time and she's the second member of Congress to do this. About two to three weeks ago Steve King from Iowa pointed out that hidden in Obamacare Pelosi and Reid had snuck in a provision that spends $105 billion every year implementing the bill. "What do you mean, $105 billion to implement the bill?" Exactly. It's just $105 billion of slush fund spending. And it was one of those things, nobody knew what was in the bill, was 2,200 pages, one of those things nobody knew was in it until it was passed, like Pelosi said, "We gotta pass this thing to find out what's in it."
So you'll recall when Steve King first brought this up and it was part of the original effort to repeal the bill, he ran into some obstacles at the Republican leadership not wanting to deal with this and target this provision. Remember the argument here was, is the House leadership gonna go after the meat here, or they gonna be true to the rules of the House that they had set up? Remember the leadership of the House thinks that you, the voters, want them to abide by the rules because you the voters are very much aware how the Democrats did not abide by the rules that they themselves wrote when they ran the House from 2006 to the present, until last November. And so the House leadership said, "We're gonna obey the rules, and what King wants to do is take that $105 billion, is not part of the rules, we can't do it." So they shot him down. Michele Bachmann is trying to bring it back up, trying to alert everybody that it exists. And, by the way, it all revolves around a potential government shutdown and this advance appropriation of $105 billion in the health care bill.
Let's go to the audio sound bites. This is an example, Gregory is grilling her, but she's not backing down about Obama. He says, "You referred to the Obama administration's a gangster government. You've said that this president has anti-American views. Do you believe that still?"BACHMANN: I believe that the actions of this government have been emblematic of ones that have not been based on true American values. Just consider Obamacare. Over 900 waivers have been given out to unions and protected special interests -- (crosstalk)GREGORY:
Is it appropriate to refer to --BACHMANN:
-- that are linked to the President. That's not correct.GREGORY:
-- the government as a gangster government and to question whether this president loves America?
Well, I said I do believe that actions that have been taken by this White House, I don't take back my statement on gangster government. I think that there have been actions that have been taken by this government that I think are corrupt, totally corrupt.GREGORY:
And you think the president has anti-American views?BACHMANN
: I said I have very serious concerns about the president's views, and I think the president's actions in the last two years speak for themselves.RUSH: Now, folks, this sets up something that, to me, is very interesting, something I would like, frankly, to hear your thoughts on. Because I guarantee you that this split here, here's Gregory, and he represents the media, and he represents the Democrats, and he represents a lot of Republicans, saying, "Whatever you think, don't run around saying he's anti-American. Whatever you say or think, don't run around and say he's a gangster government. You don't want to say that." She's not backing down, "I think he is. I don't back off from my gangster government statement and I don't think that this guy's got traditional American values and views in his agenda."
Okay, so let's take this and move forward a little bit into the presidential election year and let's just for the sake of our hypothetical here, let's say we've got a nominee. I don't care who it is, doesn't matter. We've got a Republican nominee. We've got four-dollar-a-gallon gasoline, four fifty. We've got unemployment. Let's say they've been able to bring it down to eight and a half percent. That's their number. We've got a supposed economic recovery taking place, but it's not something everybody senses. It's something we're told is taking place, but it's not something everybody can get their arms around. So we have a basic economic circumstance not much different than now. We have gasoline prices up. We've got the Middle East in turmoil. We've got a situation in Afghanistan where nobody now knows what's going on. In fact, Gates is now saying we're gonna be there a lot longer than 2012.
So the presidential campaign, here's the question. You got an incumbent, Barack Hussein Obama. Does the Republican nominee focus on what we all believe to be true, the guy's got a different view of the American tradition than all the rest of us? Do we say, does our nominee, does our campaign focus on portraying Obama as anti-traditional American values, do we say this guy is a socialist, this guy's models consist of Marx and Alinsky, do we go that way, do we point that out? Or do we say to ourselves, you know what, most people don't want to think that about their president. There's such reverence for the office that people don't want to think that even if they admit that they made a mistake in voting for the guy, they don't want to think that they've elected somebody who is essentially an enemy of traditional American founding values.
So the alternative is, rather than point all that stuff out, we just focus on policy. We say things like the president's economic policy is such and it's led to $4.50 gasoline, the president's policies, which show no signs of changing, he seems wedded to these policies, has led to us an endless unemployment rate of between eight and 10%. In other words, do we depersonalize this and strictly focus the reelection campaign in the opposition to Obama on policy or do we go full bore and warn the American people why his policies are what they are? Well, I mention this because I dare say that if you are from the camp -- (interruption) what are you laughing at in there? What in the world have I said that's so funny? I dare say that if you are of the camp that wants to hear the Republican presidential nominee talk about the guy's a socialist, the guy doesn't believe in traditional American founding values, that you're gonna be sad and disappointed, you're not gonna have a candidate say that. The candidate is gonna accept that Obama's a legitimate American politician, a legitimate president, just got totally cockeyed policies. We're gonna hear policy this, policy that, that's why we're in the dumper.
Now, all the while the dirty little secret is that every Republican nominee is running for one of two reasons, A, they've just got their traditional campaign ego "country can't get along without me," or B, four more years of the guy and this country's changed forever. Four more years of this guy and we're looking at generations to get our country back. Now, they're all gonna think that, everybody knows this is a bad guy in terms of America's traditions, values, and so forth, everybody knows this guy's got some chip on his shoulder, every one of our candidates knows this. I would venture to say, folks, that zilch, zero, nada are gonna say it. That they're all gonna focus on policy, for lack of a better word. I mean they're gonna focus on his policies led this, policies led that, but they're not gonna get into his intentions, they're not gonna get into his motivations. And they are, therefore, going to leave -- (interruption) well, Snerdley said it's a losing recipe. It's what I'm asking you all. If you hear the Republican nominee, I don't care who it is, I don't care who it is for the purposes of this discussion, if you hear whoever the nominee is say the president's policies are gonna lead us to blah, blah, are you going to ask, "Well, why do you think that?"
Beyond policy are you gonna be interested in our nominee's opinion of Obama's motivation? For example, I'm comfortable saying this myself, I'm not running for orifice, nobody in their right mind who's trying to revive a private sector enemy and create jobs would do anything Obama's doing, and if they were seriously well-intentioned but mistaken, they'd dropped this and go for something else. He's not dropping it. He's doubling down on all this. He's doubling down on the unions. He's doubling down on crimping the private sector, doubling town on growing government, doubling down on deficits, doubling down on spending. At some point do you have to say, "Why?" Does that become part of the campaign question, "Why is he doing this?" Well, he must just be naive. He must be well-intentioned but just, you know, incompetent. Or now he's got a design on this country we don't have. I mention this because Bachmann is out there not holding back. Gangster government, anti-American values, she's saying it.
Does it make you uncomfortable, or are you going, "You go, girl." And do you want your presidential nominee to be taking the same tack or do you think it's a loser? 'Cause I'll guarantee you this, there isn't a whole lot that's changed despite a lot of things that have changed, and I can pretty much guarantee you that our nominee is gonna be scared to death of losing independents. And our nominee, whoever the hell he or she is, is gonna think that the best way to lose the independents is to go after Obama personally. I guarantee it. Whether it's true or not, that's what they're gonna be afraid of doing, losing the independents. They're gonna want to hold onto the independents, and they think going after Obama personally as Bachmann does here is gonna just cause the independents to flee the scene, fly the coop.
Now, would you tell me, Snerdley, what are you laughing about? Has Premiere Radio hired you to be an actor and start laughing at me during my program? Hmm, oh. See, Snerdley thinks I have an ulterior motive to what I'm doing here. And I don't. He thinks I'm flushing people out. I'm not flushing anybody out. I'm telling you what I know is gonna happen. I'm telling you I know what's coming down the pike, and Bachmann has thrown her hat in the presidential ring, but it's not why I'm bringing this up. You're voters, you're the base. I guarantee you the nominee, whoever he or she is, is gonna think there's nowhere else you can go but him or her. So they may not think they have to service you in the campaign. They may think we have to offer the red meat of this guy's socialist, Marxist, Saul Alinsky, 'cause they're afraid doing that might lose precious independents and so forth and so on. So they just focus on policy. I'm just asking the question here, what do you expect, what do you want, what would your reaction be?
I'll play a little bit more of Bachmann to illustrate what I'm talking about here. Snerdley, there's no grand design here, and I'm not making the case for Michele Bachmann. You know darn well I'm not gonna pick a candidate right now. That's not at all what I'm doing. The way she's handling Gregory here simply turned on a couple lightbulbs that had been dimmed in my fertile cranial cavity here to ask a question about how's this campaign gonna shape up 'cause I'm telling you, look at it. Gas prices are five bucks and you're still not gonna get the same kind of media coverage of it that we got when it was inching up to four bucks when Bush was president. You are not gonna get the sob stories of people walking to work with holes in their shoes. You're not gonna get that. You're not gonna get the personification or the portrayal of the country as in any kind of economic quagmire here. You're not gonna get that kind of assistance like they gave the Democrats going after Bush when gasoline was going up to four bucks. Now, here's a guy that's responsible for the price going up. Middle East this, Middle East that. We're not drilling for oil! We've cut back our own domestic drilling. The guy doesn't want oil, he doesn't want coal. He's going after the stupid little shining green city on the hill that doesn't exist.
Now, back to more Michele Bachmann on Meet the Depressed yesterday. She's one of the few Republicans who remembers what the last election was actually about, and it wasn't that long ago. It was about the fraud that is Obamacare and the spending and the indebtedness. So the host, David Gregory -- who is just so disturbed that someone might say Obama's "gangster government; Mr. Gregory so disturbed someone might question whether Obama's views are traditional, American founding-type views -- says to Michele Bachmann, "You heard the president this week offer an accommodation to the states to opt out of the individual mandate where necessary to tailor to their own states. Why isn't that the sort of give the Republicans wanted?"BACHMANN:
David, that's not a give at all. In effect all that is is a pretext for implementing a single-payer plan. If you recall the president's entire statement, he said, "The states can opt out as long as they stay within the requirements of all of Obamacare unless they want to go with single-payer plan." Obamacare is a crime against democracy. It has been a deception from the beginning. Remember, the president told us it was a mandate, not a tax. Now in the federal court he's arguing it's a tax, not a mandate.RUSH:
Let me add something to this -- and it's something that I have stated on previous broadcast occasions. They want this to fail! They want all of this to fail. That's why all these waivers. That's to get everybody on board before the election, but they want all this to fail. She's exactly right here. This is a pretext for implementing the single-payer plan. All of the states and their plans and the local and the private sector health care companies, it's all about them failing. It's all about this not working. So then the last resort's what? Obama! The federal government! So there you have it.
Michele Bachmann said, "Obamacare is a crime against democracy." It's a fraud. It is a pretext to implementing a single-payer plan. Mr. Gregory, this is not an opt-out. This is not any give on the part of the regime. This is simple acknowledging he's got a legal problem right now and he wants to skate around it for a while. So it takes us back to my hypothetical setup. Because the presidential campaign is gonna begin in earnest soon. In fact you got, what, five or six Republicans in Iowa today, or this week. So it's now starting to intensify. At some point we're gonna get the polling data with front-runners and all this sort of stuff and it's gonna matter, to you, what kind of campaign you want. Remember, it was McCain that ran around saying (screaming McCain impression), "Obama's a fine American, a fine man, and I don't want hear any thing otherwise, you got it? Limbaugh, you shut up! Nothing! I'll have nothing dishonorable! You mention his name is 'Hussein,' you say that one of my rallies, and you're toast, pal! You're fired!"BREAK TRANSCRIPT