Michelle Bachmann was quoted in a piece from NPR today.┬áSpeaking about the Tea Party, she said, “They believe that we are taxed enough already, that the federal government should not spend more money than it takes in, and that the Congress should act within the constitutional limitations as given to us by the Founding Fathers,” she said. “That is the banner that we believe in.”

Okay, let’s do the math piece by piece:

  1. “[W]e are taxed enough already.” No tax increases — check.
  2. “[T]he federal government should not spend more money than it takes in.” No budget deficits — check.
  3. The federal deficit is now running about $1.4 trillion annually — check.

So if we are not to increase taxes and we are not to incur deficits, and if the deficit is $1.4 trillion, then Michelle Bachmann needs to either (a) Present her plan for cutting $1.4 trillion in federal spending, or (b) Shut her pie hole.


(Bear with me, I watched the show this morning; I don’t have precise quotes.)

Chris Wallace was interviewing Michelle Bachmann on Fox News Sunday this morning, and pushed her a bit on her rhetoric that Obama was “anti-American” and this was the “most radical administration in US history.” Her explanation was that Obama had caused America to go from “100% of the economy in the private sector’s hands, to 51% of it being in the government’s hands.” She listed the government’s takeover of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the banking industry, AIG, the auto manufacturing companies and healthcare as the basis for her claim.

To his credit, Wallace observed that the government’s intervention in Fannie, Freddie and the banking industry was done by a Republican president. To Bachmann’s discredit, she did not amend her views.

Wallace could have gone much further. He could have mentioned that the government’s investments in the banking industry are transitory, designed to be exited at the earliest possible date. In fact, I believe all the huge “too big to fail” banks except Bank of America have repaid the government and exited the TARP program. He could have mentioned that the government already was a vast player in the healthcare business long before Obama came along.

There is a valid debate to be had about the proper scope of government. There is a valid point to be made that Obama is moving us in the “more” direction. But Bachmann’s rhetoric shows that either she’s colossally uninformed, or completely uninterested in any such debate.