Getty Images
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and a handful of right-wing colleagues recently launched a bizarre crusade, urging executive branch agencies to launch investigations to determine whether the Muslim Brotherhood has "infiltrated" the American government. Most notably, Bachmann is concerned about Huma Abedin, a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is Muslim.
Yesterday, to his credit, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) condemned the offensive effort, and today, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) made related comments to reporters.
Boehner said he did not know Abedin well, but that "from everything that I know of her she has a sterling character. I think accusations like this being thrown around are pretty dangerous."
Boehner is the latest high-profile GOP official to criticize the charges by Bachmann and four other GOP lawmakers that Abedin could be using her position at the State Department to aid the Muslim Brotherhood.
It's worth noting that Boehner last year gave Bachmann a spot on the House Intelligence Committee, giving her access to the nation's most sensitive secrets. Asked today if he might consider removing her from the intelligence panel, the Speaker added, "I don't know that that's related at all."
Well, it's "related" to the extent that the House Intelligence Committee appears to have an unhinged extremist who's trying to lead a witch hunt that Boehner himself considers "pretty dangerous."
Still, the House Speaker deserves credit -- it's not common for Republican leaders to publicly rebuke members of their own caucus, so Boehner's comments are certainly welcome.
For what it's worth, Bachmann defended herself in an interview with Glenn Beck -- no, seriously, that's who she talked to yesterday -- says she did not "infer" that Huma Abedin is "working on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood."
But Bachmann's letter (pdf) to the State Department's inspector general really did say Abedin "has three family members -- her late father, her mother and her brother-- connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. Her position affords her routine access to the Secretary and to policy-making."
Leave a Comment:
She needs to get back on her medication, and off the House floor.
She needs to OD on her medication!
You need help, immediately.
A kudo to Boehner for saying this. Saying you will stop this type nonsense from your peers would be even more courageous. Your hope that Bachmann would absorb some smarts from being on the Intelligence Committee failed miserably. Her rhetoric is damaging our already shaky reputation abroad, so please muzzle her. Perhaps you can ask POTUS to post her as ambassador to Iceland. Probably very few Muslims there.
I don't think Boehner deserves any praise for his statement. In fact, I'm not praising John McCain either. Both of these men have remained silent for these past three years of perpetual and unrelenting hate speech directed against the Democratic party and against President Obama specificallty.
Notice that neither Boehner nor McCain has spoken out against Sununu or Santorum. You do remember that Santorum compared President Obama to the genocidal maniac dictator Benito Mussolini.
No one has stepped in to tell Romney that President Obama is not "foreign."
Neither Boehner nor McCain has stepped up to put an end to the "birther" crap.
Neither Boehner nor McCain has demanded that Romney quit distorting President Obama's words or that Romney just stop telling outright lies on the campaign trail.
And Boehner has, himself, been responsible for engaging in such deplorable distortion, deception, slander and outright hate speech.
Sure--for one minute on one, single day, these two men stood up and said something that made them appear honorable. But look at their behavior over the rest of these last three-and-a-half years.
A Citizen,
Those are outstanding examples of why Agent Orange and Grandpa McWar do not deserve any praise.
Yes, excellent reasons, if any one of them had any validity, as it is, just bunk.
What do you have against Iceland? Iceland deserves better . . . .
..........How far is to right...........
.
Anywhere near a teapub.
And in November, Michelle Bachmann will be re-elected.
You're probably right. Sad to see that there would be so many vote for this air headed bomb thrower.
I'd heard that the gerrymandering done that enabled her to win last time has been corrected and that it means it's less likely for her to win in November. I would love to hear more verification on that, if anyone has any resources re: it.
That would be awesome Susie, this lady is not helping at all.
Has anyone considered that Bachmann has been unleashed so the rest of the party can correct her and look "mainstream" for the general election?
Bingo. "Stalking horse" is the term.
But she's also apparently scores very low on the "plays nicely with others" and "respects other people's property" sections of her leadership scorecard and, as I recall, made some kind of quixotic bid for a leadership position, which annoyed them, so giving her a smack serves more than one purpose.
I'm just always a little suspicious when something happens that is win-win. Bachmann wins with her usual support groups by attacking Muslims and looking like a 'rebel', the other Republicans win by denouncing her etc
There's too many people winning here.
It's only "suspicious" when you have a trap door in your head!
I think all trolls, especially sock puppets should go down a trap door.
Is that your substitute for actual thought or debate Entropy? Calling somebody names like "troll"? That's the best response you have? And are you calling me a "sock puppet"? If that's the case, you are not only lacking in intellect, but a liar as well!
Do all left-wingers just resort to name calling when they are losing the argument?
You can take your self-righteous indignation and...well, you know. As I told you on the other thread, I am not impressed by it. And as I noted on the other thread, your reaction is a classic troll reaction, replete with whining when people do not take your dishonesty seriously. A self-respecting non-conservative should be willing to identify a liar as a lair, a hypocrite as a hypocrite, and a bigot as a bigot whenever it is applicable. I will not pretend to respect you because it is my considered opinion that you are not even remotely worthy of respect. As I said before, deal with it.
I would say that "troll" is a verb, not a noun. As I view it, trolling is casting out a lure or bait and moving through water until some fish bites.
Maybe some thought at how the debate is framed such as "only someone with a trap door in their head" (? )would think blah de blah". That is casting out bait to talk bad about someone's comment. What good does that do, self congratulating (or some other self gratification) for cleverness?
Trolling also seems to have an element of "how do I make myself the victim after I make a comment about a comment?"
In my short reading of this thread, it appears Micah started the insults with people here having "a trap door in your head".
That sounds like a bait asking for an argument that is pretty much off the topic and basically saying your comments are because you have a trap door in your head"
Honestly, is that discussing the issue of the possible game of role playing, like good cop, bad cop?
I feel this is a waste of time, which is why there is a code of conduct about being respectful.
All that said, IMO, there is a game of bad cop, good cop going on here.
The tactics are used to appeal to the different views. They are trying to make peace between the T.P. and the non T.P. Republicans. Like after Hilary backers were feeling underwhelmed with the nominee after the dust settled.
Sandy,
Why aren't those on the right held to the "code of conduct"? As things usually go, they have to get really, really bad before they are disciplined.
I am not sure what is the right way to handle that situation. I've read that one should report violators, then I've read don't feed trolls as it offers nothing to the discussion and they will give up. I've also read respond with the same level of venom as the person starting it.
I at times use each of those responses. I find that some ignore it/ignore feature (I have done that at times). I believe the idea is that the person posting such stuff loses interest. It seems to be useless to get into a flame war by someone attempting to provoke it. But sometimes the person needs to hear why they are not being victimized, but being responded to with some kind of appropriate correction of how to debate.
I just don't know why anybody would think they are clever to ridicule someone's post and wait for the opportunity to claim victimhood.
If it is a debate, then debate the subject/issue. Debate is not mocking someone's mental capacity with such troll bait.
I can't answer the question, but the trolling is not why I am here, but to exchange thoughts. Not much interested in the trolling activity.
I know moderators need to be notified of the offenses. Under the exclamation point are choices to ignore the author, report or call a post of no value, spam or inflammatory.
.
Bachman will be re-elected, because she is in a safe Republican seat. She is going on this witch hunt because as a member of the Intelligence Committee, she has access to some info and she has some status as a committee member. She doesn't necessarily believe that Abedin is a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood. She is simply stirring up trouble to get her base riled up against the Obama Administration.
She herself doesn't need the votes or the contributions, but she is using this position to get more votes and more contributions for her fellow congressmen and for Mitt Romney.
She riles up the base, and Boehner pacifies the independents by sounding reasonable (given McCain's principled stand).
Good points. I don't think Boehner or McCain deserve much credit. At best, they figured that Bachmann's comments were too much of a public relations liability to ignore them.
So it's not possible that they may have found Bachmann's comments reprehensible? Unbelievable!
Agent Orange and Grandpa McWar? As far as I'm concerned, there is no realistic possibility that they genuinely found Bachmann's motives reprehensible, since they are themselves reprehensible. Just because some people feel obliged to go out of their way to give them unwarranted praise in no way obliges me to do so, RobDon. Or is it Skip Hoffman. Or both? And yes, I'm mostly convinced that you are a sock puppet, although you could be one for a banned poster.
If Bachman is just doing this to rile up her base then it needs to be pointed out that people may die because of her reckless stunt. These stunts get set straight over to the middle east inflame the people there.
Remember that pastor down in Florida who was burning the Koran. How many riots did that cause and how many died because of it.
Dangerous is the right word for Bachman.
Are you questioning my integrity you spineless coward? Why don't you post you're real name them and I'll be happy to contact you and I can give you the opportunity to say it to my face. But you'd be too scared to do that, because you know that you are gutless as well as lacking in basic intelligence.
Typical troll macho posturing. I'm quaking in my boots...NOT! Since you yourself brought up the subject, it is my considered opinion that you have no integrity. Nobody with integrity could possibly claim that Rush Limbaugh is not a conservative.
Keep lying EntropyRules, if it makes you feel better! ;) I'm certainly not a troll, but it's hilarious that you'll resort to lying and reporting me, because you can't win an argument! haha You really are a pathetic coward! LOL! I bet you have a condom in your wallet that has been there for a long, long time! I'm right little man, aren't I? ;) http://pics.pof.com/dating/93/37/qrtsd2uzis_169994774-2.jpg Good looking sort, ain't he? LMFAO!
Anyone who tries to insist that Rush Limbaugh is not a conservative obviously has no interest in honest discussion. And how about some more of those boffo gibes about MSNBC?
The word intelligence, and Bachmann should never be seen together in any form or reference.
McCain did the honorable thing. IT's too bad his honor is pretty situational. As for Boehner, he's too afraid of doing the same and condemning the lies that his "fellow" GOP/TP people are telling. It's more than "dangerous", Speaker, it's a flat out filthy lie that these people are spreading. And to allow one of these liars to have access to the highest level of secrets of the US? That's what is dangerous. Does anyone think for one minute that the lunatic Bachmann wouldn't turn that information over to her lunatic friends if she thought "God" wanted her to do so?
Boehner says…""I don't know that that's related at all."
I guess trying to play himself off, as just "Bush Stupid", is the best he can come up with when trying to cover for his own ineptitude.
"House INTELLIGENCE Committee", really?
Republicans have certainly turned that into the definition of an oxymoron.
Almost like Issa on the oversight committee. Teapubs love having the fox guard the henhouse.
Bachmann is just another antichrist posing as a christian to turn Jesus into the God of Hate.
Check out the Borowitz report at the New Yorker. It's really good. It addresses Rep. Twit's basic problem.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/
Look to the right and what do you see..
Insanity?..Hoof in Mouth?..Proof evolution can result in mistakes?..
Why do republicans want to destroy America? Don't they think Bush did a good enough job?
Uhhhhh, just out of curiousity, is she telling the truth about the family members??
So, can I post here and engage in civil debate without some head case lying about me and trying to get me banned because they are so unhappy? Any honest liberals want to discuss issues?
Something else to check out is the Daily Show. Jon Stewart showed how Bachmann's attempt at connecting Ms. Abeden to the Muslim brotherhood depended on several very tenuous links, mostly her long dead father having worked at one time with someone who worked with another organization that may have had links to the Muslim Brotherhood. Then he showed how it only takes two links to connect Bachmann to the jihadists. She received campaign donations from HSBC which has been laundering money for several groups connected to al Qaeda and for Iran. Maybe she needs to be investigated.
And if you want to do a Beck style analysis, don't forget that Bachmann pretzels were implicated in an assassination attempt on George W. Bush. So now we know that Bachmann didn't think W was sufficiently conservative and tried to take him out.
Your facts are lacking.
So.....a close confidante and highly placed Clinton staffer whose family is active in the Muslim Brotherhood isn't even remotely questionable?
Seems to me there are too many people who do not know anything about islam and what they really believe. There are also many claiming to be christian who really know very little about what the bible actually states regarding principles, values, etc. My case in point: Boehner, McCain, Bachmann, and most politicians do NOT really understand islam. Read the quran and study it. Read the bible and study it. Don't be lazy and take others opinions for your own understanding. I have been a student of both and will say, Boehner and McCain are very lazy. Bachmann has not been stellar in her conclusions either, but is closer to reality than those two idiots.
Michelle Bachmann has demonstrated resolve, courage and intelligence. She is a valued member of the House Intellgence Committee. She now has raised questions that need to be answered.
1.Does the fact that Abedin's family association with the Muslim Brotherhood impact Abedin's advice? In other words, what kind of government secrets could be forced from Abedin by the Muslim Brotherhood's coercion of her family members?
2. What pressure could the MB put on her via her family?
3. What is the relationship of Abedin to her family?
4.What access to which sensitive material does Abedin have?
5.What protocols are in place to insure that someone with Abedin's family structure and associations are effective in preventing Abedin from suffering pressure from her family to subvert the interests of the United States?
6.Why do establishment, RINO types attempt to destroy a colleague?
7.Should we ever have someone in a sensitive position that COULD BE subject to such pressures?
8. Would we be better served if such people with such family members be relegated to lower, non sensitive duties?
9. What purpose is served by having someone with these potential risks? That is, why do the establishment feel it is absolutely necessary for someone like Abedin to be there? Is there a larger agenda?
I for one think that Ms Bachmann is a patriot for taking the risk she has in raising this issue in her campaign. She undoubtedly knew there were people who were protecting Ms Abedin. She obviously did not know the length and breadth of their perfidy, which , in itself, is a very interesting line of inquiry.
We applaud Ms Bachmann for yet again displaying resolve, courage and intelligence.
interesting posts: here's one from a reformed liberal:
i have yet to delve into why bachmann and others sent the letter in question; but, reading these posts and noting the responses from such progressives like mccain and boehner; one can see how out of touch progressives are; as well as many old guard, washed up, republicans.
history shows that mccarthy was right in going after individuals in hollywood and elsewhere in an effort to route out communists. it was communism then; now it's islamic fundamentalism. it is a danger to all we know ; despite what intellectual elitists, over educated academics and the leftist media may ,naively,think. people that might promote , islamic fundamentalism or sympathize with it need to be vetted; if they are in our government or may have an influence on it.
as to the progressive whining about "hate speech; please ! it is quite clear that progressives are masters at hate speech and use it as a matter of course and on a regular basis.
oh , i might divulge here that, i did not vote for president obama. i did some research into his past record and did not like what i found . i guess i must be old fashion, but, to me; an elected rep. that historically votes not present or absent; is a coward. he is a shinning example of what he promised to rid washington of. he is, in bold face, an illustration of the unsavory sales tactic of the " bait and switch"
he promised to rid washington of influence pedaling; failure : his admin pedels plenty.
he promised to not stack his administration with wallstreet insiders: failure: his admin. is infested with insiders
he promised to have a "transparent" administration: failure: his admin has been anything but "transparent"
he promised to reduce the deficit: failure (no need to expound here)
he promised to repair americas image around the world: failure : all that bowing amounted to nothing, he is perceived as being weak.
he promise to bring americans together: failure: he has raised the use of class warfare to the level of fine art and used it to divide, every chance he can.
and on and on and on. progressives can deflect all they want. one can not avoid the obvious. i don't care what bush did or did not do. i don't care that "all politicians lie". this president is an amateur, a plebeian. his administration of top shelf people has done bottom shelf work.
absolutely everything that president obama and the left have castigated romney, republicans and conservatives for; the president and the left have actually practiced in spades.
i mean really; the guy, whose own net worth , pegged at 8 million, is passing himself off as a man of the people ? he has taken on and fully embraced the trappings of the well healed as a new member of americas well to do. the problem is that the new rich lack the class and polish that one acquires from moving about the social circles of our economic upper classes. that takes generations.
hint: you might be a member of the new rich if you are at a black tie affair; yet, tuck your dinner napkin into the collar of your shirt.