The results are in from the Iowa caucus and its not pretty. With the MN 6th district paying her federal employee salary for campaigning almost non-stop for the Republican presidential nomination , mostly in Iowa, MB has garnered only 5% of the caucus votes. A result so dismal that she has “suspended ” her run for the nomination.

After the results were known, reflecting the predictions of  various polls, MB vowed to carry on. In a rambling address to devoted followers she continued her rant(s) that were responsible for her failure to follow up her straw poll victory last August with a embarrassing showing in such a conservative and evangelical  state. However this promise was hollow, as many of her words are, and she dropped out of the race the next day. At least Rick Perry had the decency to tell supporters he had to think over his situation

Ironically starting in the town of  Waterloo, at least a name sake of where Napoleon met his defeat, her run for the Republican presidential nomination started on a high note winning the Ames Straw Poll in August .  From there it was pretty much down hill. This defeat has shown that the  sweeping rhetoric she incorporates on the stump  has no substance. She makes no substantive  proposals that would ever have a chance of  being incorporated into law. We must remember her job is to help make law. She is a law maker and elected to do so.

Using fear mongering  of such things as illegal immigrants, foreign powers, socialist agendas, abortion  and “Big Government”, Muslims including  Kieth Ellison a member of the US House of Representatives ,   among others  has been her stock in trade.  Her claims of having a titanium spine became  comic as time wore on.

Garnering only 5% of the vote will not stop her from continuing her rants and attempts at being in the spotlight, her real goal.  She claims to be an evangelist( but she is not spreading the good word from what she says)  with a following that will continue to send her money for her “work” against the perceived threats previously mentioned. She is a true charismatic and even if her believers are only 1% of the Republicans, throw in a few non affiliated voters and she will still be a celeb.

Paul Krugman has panned the much touted,by republicans at least, plan by House member Paul Ryann. Here are some of the hard hit it takes.

A more sober assessment from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office tells a different story. It finds that a large part of the supposed savings from spending cuts would go, not to reduce the deficit, but to pay for tax cuts. In fact, the budget office finds that over the next decade the plan would lead to bigger deficits and more debt than current law.

Then This

In the past, Mr. Ryan has talked a good game about taking care of those in need. But as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, of the $4 trillion in spending cuts he proposes over the next decade, two-thirds involve cutting programs that mainly serve low-income Americans. And by repealing last year’s health reform, without any replacement, the plan would also deprive an estimated 34 million nonelderly Americans of health insurance.

This from a Paul Krugman column in the NYTimes for Fri  April 8 here is a link  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/opinion/08krugman.html?hp

My faith, though faith is not a good way to run a government, is in the CBO as they work to find out what is in these kinds of bills will supposedly cost/save without political spin(hopefully).  We need answers and from what I see neither the Dem’s or the Repb’s are able to supply them .

In The Sunday NYTimes we have this

Our Cowardly Congress

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

I couldn’t agree more with Kristof. The Republican plan to take funds from such groups as Planned Parenthood  and The UN Population Fund would increase, not decrease, abortion. Without the help of these organization women, mostly poor , underprivileged , ignorant women would become pregnant and either have children or abortions and given the situations they are in both options are horrible. Yes horrible choices are the result of this kind of budget rider nonsense.

We are in trouble and yes abortions are a terrible option but  this option must not be removed . The top 40% of our income/wealth earners will always have this option no matter what their political affiliation. Remember that there are pro choice  and  anti choice citizens of both parties.

The Republicans in general and especially  Michele Bachmann and her ilk want to nulify the supreme court and its finding concerning the legality of abortion in Row vs Wade.

It is looking more and more like Michele Bachmann’s political career , at least the elective office portion, is nearing an end. With just 5% from her own party’s vote in the Iowa caucus there are rumblings that she may not even try to hold her House seat in 2012 as reported on Newsmax.com today. That and Newsmax also reports her financing has dried up as the electorate learned she is a a light weight when it comes to policy or as they portray it that she is a ” Gadfly” the Minnesota version of all hat and no cattle(though her family has received subsidy payments for their dairy farm)

Of course she will continue on the lecture circuit being well paid for preaching to the choir.  She will not be the only one , both right and left- R or D , that will be trading on their celebrity rather than helping to implement practical solutions for problems confronting the US and the world, there are many.

As a MN 6th resident I couldn’t be happier. Perhaps we will get someone actually willing to work at being a legislator and getting things through the House process of making and amending laws. If you were to check MB’s legislative record you would see she is short on sponsoring/co-sponsoring laws.  The last time I talked to her office I wanted to know her position on the legislative proposal that would prohibit the members of Congress trading stocks due to information that is not in the public domain. As a member of the House Intelligence Committee where most work is done in secret it is highly likely she would have information on what companies are developing hardware and software that could be used by our civilian and military intelligence agencies and the size of the contracts that could be associated with same. Her office informed me she had no opinion on that matter.