Michele Bachmann: China's Hu is "Your Daddy"
Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. addresses CPAC, Feb. 10, 2011.
/ AP Photo/Alex Brandon"With all the money that we owe China, I think you might correctly say, Hu's your daddy," she quipped.
Bachmann told an audience of enthusiastic conservative activists that "we have seen President Obama usher in socialism under his watch over the last two years." She said the health care law passed last year is the "crown jewel of socialism" and said repealing it "is the motivation of my life."
NRA's Wayne LaPierre: "Government Policies Are Getting us Killed"Santorum Blasts Obama for Siding with Egyptian Protesters
McConnell: We'll Keeping Fighting Health Care Law Whether It's Popular or Not
Bachmann, who is considering a presidential campaign, has aligned herself closely with the Tea Party movement, having founded the Tea Party caucus in the House and offered a "Tea Party rersponse" to President Obama's State of the Union address. She opened her speech with a reference to that speech, over which she was mocked for not looking directly at the camera.
Sizing Up the 2012 GOP Presidential Contenders
"Someone told me I needed to find the right camera, so there it is," she said.
Bachmann offered red meat to her young audience at the conference, a cattle call for GOP presidential contenders that had about 11,000 registered attendees. She repeatedly referenced the socialism she ascribed to the Obama administration, calling it a "formula for destruction of job creation," and warned that her audience could soon be paying a 75 percent tax rate to cover the nation's debts.
"Socialism might sell well in a Harvard faculty lounge, but when it comes to finding a job, not so much, not so much," she said.
Newt Gingrich: Replace the EPARead All of Hotsheet's Reports from CPAC
"The most egregious moral wrong of all is that today's government is intentionally consuming the labor of future Americans that aren't even born," she added. "...no generation has been more selfish than the current generation that is running Washington DC."
Bachmann claimed that if Mr. Obama wins another term, "we will be in debt to the tune of $21 trillion." (Her call to make Mr. Obama a one-term president was met with a standing ovation.) She also expressed incredulity that members of Congress are now being asked to raise the debt ceiling.(Watch Bachmann's "Hu's Your Daddy" remark at left)
Seemingly with an eye on a possible presidential run, however, Bachmann said she was not only focused on fiscal issues. She called on fiscal conservative, social conservative and national security coalitions to come together to win elections in 2012, adding that while deficit reduction is extremely important, it is not "all there is." She said America must also maintain its moral values and push "peace through strength."
A narrow focus on fiscal issues, she said, is "neither appropriate to our times, nor is it politically conducive to a broad-based appeal that will determine our success."
"We're all about winning in 2012," she said.
Bachmann was the first big speaker at the conference, which will include speeches by Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich and many others. A late addition to the speakers list was Donald Trump, who plans to address the crowd at 3 p.m. Eastern Time.
Bachmann also said she would host an open bar/meet and greet for the 11,000 CPAC attendees late Thursday afternoon - though she was quick to note there would be a one-drink limit.
2012 Republican Contenders
Brian Montopoli is a senior political reporter for CBSNews.com. You can read more of his posts here.
Popular in Politics
- FBI director acknowledges domestic drone use 153 Comments
- Obama and Berlin: Faded echoes meet new realities 77 Comments
- Next up for Obama: Major effort on climate change
- Immigration reform would cut deficit, analysis shows 82 Comments
- House Republicans pass 20-week limit on abortions 598 Comments
- Michelle Obama and daughters tour Berlin Play Video
- IRS readying to pay $70M in employee bonuses, senator says
- IRS scandal: Is partisanship overshadowing facts?
our lawsuit against your mortgage lender forward.
To summarize, the judge himself, recognizes that the potential award against
BOA/Countrywide would be in the BILLIONS of dollars. where all the media about this story?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2011/02/michele_bachmanns_fuzzy_tax_ma.html?hpid=topnews
The Chinese Government gets result by managing its economy; therefore received the highest governmental trust ranking of 88% in the 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer?. The U.S. Government may not even deserve the 40% rating because it has done little if nothing to combat China's innovative beggar-thy-neighbor strategy.
Four deficits gave birth to the book and movie I.O.U.S.A, namely, the leadership, trade, savings and the fiscal deficits. Following the releases of the I.O.U.S.A. book/movie, the better financed special interest groups caused the fiscal commission to become a reality, leaving the remaining three deficits, most relevant to the middle-class, to fall by the wayside. These 3 middle-class-relevant deficits, namely the leadership, trade and savings deficits are most causal to our current economic plight, while the fiscal deficit is primarily the result (effect) of the first three. I.O.U.S.A. treatment of the trade deficit was framed in the context of Warren Buffett's parable Squanderville versus Thriftville. The portion of my post, titled, An America Lost in Squanderville deals with the trade deficit:
The United States' trade gap is the proverbial "leak-in the-****" with its de-simulative effect on our recovery. In November 2003, Warren Buffett in his Fortune, Squanderville versus Thriftville article recommended that America adopt a balanced trade model. The fact that advice advocating balance and sustainability, from a sage the caliber of Warren Buffett, could be virtually ignored for over seven years is unfathomable. Media coverage that China has kept it currency undervalued is a gross understatement, it has actually been keeping the U.S. dollar over-valued; which adversely affects all U.S. trade with ALL U.S. trading partners, not just trade with China. Until action is taken on Buffett's or a similar balanced trade model, America will continue to squander time, treasure and talent in pursuit of an illusionary recovery.
The Leadership deficit can be best addressed with campaign financing reform that really works. The savings deficit can be best addressed with increased productivity, similar to Japan post-WWII economic miracle pioneered by W. Edwards Deming, an American statistician and replacing federal employment and most federal income taxes with a federal consumption tax, like those used by most industrialized countries, except the United States.
When the economy has grown substantially and is booming we can cut taxes on the wealthy, but leave taxes unchanged on the middle class.
Of course we will need to regulate business so the wealthy can't play the con games that caused the recession again, no more derivatives or mortgages for 125% of the value of homes or hedge fund managers that get paid $900,000 per hour salaries. $900,000 per hour could be used to create 10,000 $30 per hour jobs. No individual is worth that unless he pees gasoline and leaves behind gold bricks when he uses the bathroom.
"Are you going to give the deductions of the Eisenhower years? At 70% without the deductions, do you expect anyone to stay in America who has the means to leave?"
They would have a choice between countries that would get about the same amount out of them in a variety of ways and countries which might nationalize their holdings or just hang the Yankee exploiters. Don't you think the wealthy value the bill of rights more than that? But you have a good point, there should be deductions on income made from US based companies which employ at least 50% of their workforce inside the USA, and on income made from US based manufacturing, and in fact on any income made from investments inside the United States. We could also say that if you are a US citizen it doesn't matter where you made your money, if you are in that income bracket you pay the taxes on it.
Move to Australia and you can pay the Aussies and US. Move to Argentina and you can still pay US until the Argentinians nationalize your holdings. And of course we can also stipulate that at the end of the 10 Years the 70% automatically drops down to 45%.
by Nmmrng February 10, 2011 9:38 PM EST
"I agree with you on the financial regulation, though. however, the only way that we can survive on a global level is to do everything to become competitive and streamline our government to make it cost effective."
I am with you on more efficient business and government practices. But if the wealthy are not going to act in the best interests of the nation (and they haven't for some time now) we also need to give them strong incentives to do so.
Maybe they will let their inner grizzlies out... in the mud.
But all fantasies of neo-contessa on neo-contessa aside, can you imagine a debate (!!) between these two? The IQ level of the country will fall 10 points in that hour!