South Carolinians will go to the polls in a few weeks to determine who the next Republican nominee for President likely will be.
For months, candidates have been coming to our state time and again to meet and speak with us. With their visits, we've learned a lot about them and about where they stand on issues important to us.
A recently published CBS/New York Times poll shows that a majority of Americans don't want President Obama re-elected. Echoing that sentiment, a recent Gallup poll reveals more people disapproving of Obama's performance than approving it. Those polls demonstrate that Americans in growing numbers are opposing Obama's misguided efforts to reconstruct our nation. What Americans want is someone they can trust to reverse the wrong direction President Obama is dragging our nation by pursuing wrong-headed policies and programs like bank bailouts, the government takeover of health care, the Stimulus, and massive deficits.
I've looked for a trustworthy candidate who's consistently worked to stop Obama's disastrous policies and programs. That candidate is Michele Bachmann.
There's been lots of talk about choosing a candidate who'll be "electable” against Obama. For starters, Republicans need a nominee, like Michele Bachmann, who stands in stark contrast to Obama. Bachmann assembled and led 40,000 citizens to Washington to stand against Obamacare, a government program that a majority of Americans want reversed, and she's consistently opposed government bailouts. At the same time, other Republican candidates have personal histories of supporting initiatives like those Michele Bachmann has been fighting against.
During the push for Hillarycare under Clinton's presidency, Newt Gingrich supported Hillary's individual mandate to purchase health insurance. With the backing of the people of South Carolina, our state officials are challenging the legality of a similar individual mandate required by Obamacare. Even worse, the universal health care program that Mitt Romney developed when he was governor of Massachusetts was the model used for Obamacare.
In researching candidate records, the differences are crystal clear. Unlike other leading candidates who now rationalize to explain their prior records, her record is consistent. Coming from the Heartland of America, Michele Bachmann shares our values while she's always sided with conservatives on the issues of our day.
She understands that every time government grows, our individual freedoms shrink. She understands that growth in government spending has damaged our nation's economy and ravaged the retirement accounts of an untold number of Americans.
We need to pay attention to a candidate's record rather than to his rhetoric in considering electability. Michele Bachmann has won every election she's ever undertaken. In contrast, Gingrich was driven from office by his own contemporaries when he was House Speaker, while Romney has incurred a dismal "electability" record by losing 17 of the 22 elections he's pursued.
When we enter the voting booth next month, will we elect a nominee like Michele Bachmann who, like our own Jim DeMint, will remain independent-minded and committed to conservative ideals, or will we vote for one of the candidates who have track records of capitulation and compromise in order to claim "progress?" I'm confident that Republicans across the nation will follow South Carolina's lead in a few weeks when we choose Michele Bachmann as our nominee.
By: Kelly Payne
High School Civics Teacher
2 Groves Hall Lane Columbia, SC
*Editor's Note: Kelly Payne is a member of the Bachmann Tea Party Coalition.She also won Wal-Mart's Teacher of the Year award for her work at Dutch Fork High School.
Mimi
4:01 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011
America needs Bachmann to go back home and take her stupidity with her. The Taliban is the best place for Bachmann and her gay husband.
Michael Calvert
4:46 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Please keep posting on here...you prove to everyone how ignorant of politics you are. You also show what liberals do when they are uneducated on facts...name call.
Nathan Hood
6:32 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011
The bank bailouts and deficits weren't Obama's creation, they existed when he got into office. Other parts of your argument seem to be saying that her inexperience is a good thing, who knows what position she would have taken on the individual mandate, she wasn't in federal politics at the time. As for her winning every election she's been in, that's a total of 3. And she's won by getting 50% of the vote in 2006, 47% of the vote in 2008 and 52% of the vote in 2010, this is despite representing perhaps the most republican district in the state of Minnesota, hardly a ringing endorsement there. Anybody can look good when they have that short of a record and that little experience.
In order to win the election, the republican candidate will have to carry more than just the Tea Party/Evangelical vote, and Bachmann's inexperience combined with her dominionist leanings (ties to the New Apostolic Reformation, etc) will drive those needed voters away.
In short, she doesn't have a chance.
kliberty
12:32 am on Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Nathan, Michele also won an election for MN State Senate, which she was a state senator for 6 years, before the 3 times she won the US Congress seat. In 2010, Nancy Pelosi targeted Michele's race with over $10 million & still Michele won. Michele is a winner & a fighter & libs are scared witless of her.
Kelly Payne
6:51 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Nathan,
As you already know, the 2012 presidential election represents a defining moment for our future. The strength of character of our next President will have a major impact on the course that we chart. Michele Bachmann is running for President because she believes that we have strayed from the character that made us great. The character of our President must correlate with that of the American people, and over the past three years we have witnessed a disturbing imbalance. And whether South Carolinians choose Bachmann or one of the other candidates, the time is long overdue that a person of character is returned to the Office.
Respectfully,
Kelly Payne
Nathan Hood
7:54 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011
I agree with you that the President needs to be a person with a good and strong character. There are at least two areas where I have trouble with Bachmann's. The first is in her treatment of the GLBT population. The fact that she believes that it is acceptable for a portion of our population to be second class citizens that do not have the same rights as the rest is extremely problematic for me. I find this to be a highly immoral position and, for me, calls her character very much into question. The other area for me are her comments about being a "subservient wife". She has stated that she got her doctorate in tax law (no mean feat, I tried for a doctorate in chemistry and was unable to complete it) not because she wanted it, but because her husband wanted her to. Again, this is deeply troubling to me, as it is not indicative to me of a person with a strong character. Our next president needs to be able to stand up to the other leaders of the world, both those we agree with and those we don't, and appear strong and leave no room for doubt about their stances and actions.
Kelly Payne
9:20 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Nathan,
Thank you for taking time to post a response. I respect your opinion. It's always refreshing to see people take an interest in the direction of our country. As a public school teacher, I learned long ago to tread lightly when sharing my political views. But I can’t sit idly any longer.
I hope during this next election Americans will understand better the value of civil discourse – the ability to elevate the debate by showing respect for those with divergent views. Given the crises we’re facing, that’s more important than ever. As our leaders grapple with ways to “right the ship” and restore the faith of the people, we’re overdue an honest, issue-oriented conversation about where we’re headed as a state and nation.
In electing the next President we all must ask ourselves does that person have the guiding principles to stand firm and always do what is in the best interest of Americans. Will that person succumb to the enticements of office at the expense of the People? Is that person driven by popularity and political ambition, or is the person a faithful servant to his or her family and God? Character transcends the challenges of any political issue du jour. ---
Kelly Payne
9:22 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Cont Part II
In his 2004 speech to the Democratic National Convention, then Illinois State Senator Obama made clear that we are not a nation divided into red states and blue states, but rather we are one America. And while these sentiments certainly rang righteously, this President’s actions since taking the Oath of Office have flown in the face of unity and raised deep concerns about the character of the man. Confronted with difficult economic circumstances and challenging issues, this President consistently chooses the low road by vindictively criticizing his dissenters with piercing rhetoric and standing by idly as his supporters wage claims that any opposing view must be borne in racism. His character has shown clear as he stands with those who hate America, while he accepts political donations form those he protests.
Whether we choose Bachmann or one of the other candidates, the time is long overdue that a person of character is returned to the Office.
Respectfully,
Kelly
Nathan Hood
1:27 pm on Wednesday, December 14, 2011
@kliberty: As one of those libs, I can tell you that I am not scared by Michele Bachman. I am dismayed by her beliefs that LGBTs are not to be granted the same rights as everyone else, I am amused by her gaffes and belief that god was behind the recent earthquakes, saddened that she feels she must be subservient to her husband and cannot be her own person and I feel dread about what this country would be like under her administration.
Robert Wittner
7:39 pm on Wednesday, December 14, 2011
In 11/11, all the Republican candidates were asked about the renewal of the payroll tax cut, all replying"Yes", but MB said, "I do not support the renewal of the payroll tax" because Social Security is going broke so rapidly already. Why would we want to push it over the edge even faster?
Giving the demagogic answer of "Yes" to a Republican constituency to this demagogic question was the default position of her Republican rivals, since they are against all tax increases.
But as MB explained elsewhere: 1) It is profoundly irresponsible fiscally to push SS over the edge even faster just for a few more votes; 2) 47% of Americans pay no Federal taxes other than the payroll (SS) tax. Why should we relieve these free riders from the obligation to pay for their own retirements, since future generations of taxpayers will have to pick up the tab even if these free riders did not pay into their own SS accounts?
Congresswoman Bachmann is the most principled, courageous Constitutional Conservative on the national scene: the little lady with the spine of titanium.