Pharyngula

Posted by: Glen Davidson | October 23, 2008 3:40 PM

Just goes to show that the commies have infiltrated even the (previously god-like) Republican party.

You can't escape the un-American bastards running everything in America.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

Posted by: Virgil Samms | October 23, 2008 3:44 PM

GOP reduces ad spending in Colorado
You've got to set priorities, and hey, those designer outfits aren't cheap.

Posted by: Jeff | October 23, 2008 3:53 PM

I'm wondering if this is because the GOP isn't about the McCarthyism anymore, just doesn't want to talk too loudly about it in public, or simply realized that she's self-destructed so they'd be wasting money on her campaign.

Posted by: varlo | October 23, 2008 3:54 PM

Since I live in what may be one of the unpatriotic states (on Nov 4 I hope so) perhaps I should not comment, but while I missed the original airing of this harpy's idiocy, I did see some excerpts. If anything, PZ, your original post was overly kind to this pitiful specimen of humanity. Of course if she loses her seat she can buy a blonde wig and claim to be one of the Coulter twins.

Posted by: WithoutSol | October 23, 2008 4:04 PM

Check this out:

http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=Pharyngula&date=today%207-d&cmpt=q

Posted by: MikeM | October 23, 2008 4:09 PM

I've wondered when they pull funding from the McCain campaign.

Seriously.

They know it's lost, and there must be 1-2 seats they can adequately fund, thus keeping the Dems from getting 60 seats in the Senate. At some point, you have to pull funding from any and all lost causes and pour it into close races.

McCain is a lost cause.

But it won't happen, because they're too stupid.

Posted by: Eric Atkinson | October 23, 2008 4:13 PM

Another reason to vote for Obama:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/10/021856.php

Posted by: Rey Fox | October 23, 2008 4:18 PM

Wow. Now let's hope it's truly a flameOUT, as in OUT of Congress.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | October 23, 2008 4:21 PM

I suspect there was a sharp drop in her polling numbers recently. Otherwise, the money would stay if they thought she would win.

Posted by: JohnnieCanuck, FCD | October 23, 2008 4:28 PM

Bad Brad. Bad.

Posted by: Nick | October 23, 2008 4:34 PM

Watching the Republicans this year is like watching the last act of Hamlet. The only thing that remains to be seen is who will take the role of Fortinbras and pick up the remains of Denmark...I mean the GOP.

Posted by: Cujo359 | October 23, 2008 4:49 PM

Jeff @ 5: I suspect it's number three. The Bachmann campaign's numbers, the ones that are public at least, don't look good for her campaign. One needn't posit any private polling that's worse, although it's possible there is some.

Posted by: bastion | October 23, 2008 5:33 PM

This is very troubling. We need to know who the people at the NRCC are associating with. We need to know who they are palling around with.

The news media should do a penetrating expose to expose these individuals at the NRCC and take a great look at the views of the people at the NRCC to see if they are pro-American or anti-America. I think people would love to see an expose like that.

Posted by: Luger Otter Robinson | October 23, 2008 6:34 PM

One theory is that the Republicans expect to win her district, so they don't need to put any money into her campaign, and that they also get some credit with the independents by apparently dissociating themselves from her. Another theory is that they want her to lose so that they can replace her with someone else more reasonable in the next election. They could also be hoping for a voter backlash. We had a similar, but not quite as odd, politician in Australia (Pauline Hanson) who was running in a safe Labor seat for the Liberals, made some fairly outrageous statements before the 1996 election, and had her endorsement cancelled by John Howard and then went on to winning her seat.

Posted by: The Chemist | October 23, 2008 7:07 PM

Well this may make Bidlack's job a lot easier. Meanwhile, I don't think the NRCC is appalled, I just think they're cutting their losses because they feel strongly she is going to lose (or win.)

Posted by: Canuck | October 23, 2008 7:43 PM

Old news. If you want up to the minute information on things like this, you need to take your browser to the Talking Points Memo web site. It's got the bleeding edge on campaign information. As much as I love this blog, the political stuff here is posted much earlier over at TPM. No slight to PZ; he's in the biology, genetics and godlessness business. Politics here is kind of an afterthought. Relevant, but not the top item. You want to know about whackjobs like Bachmann, TPM has it all.

Posted by: abb3w | October 23, 2008 8:16 PM

Easy to explain. Many Republicans are familiar enough with military terminology to understand the idea of "triage".

Posted by: foxfire | October 23, 2008 8:37 PM

The GOP is apparently ready to start eating it's own:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14891.html

Posted by: inkadu | October 23, 2008 8:49 PM

Cancuk - Bachman represents PZ's district, so he's allowed late to the party.

I initially heard about Bachmann on some re-runs of that Minnesota Atheist show PZ's always pimping. She's apparently been bat shit crazy since before she was elected.

Posted by: RamblinDude | October 23, 2008 9:10 PM

I'm shocked that even Republicans have limits to what they will support.

I wouldn't second guess what those limits are; the far right wing crowd is just fucking nuts. Down here in Florida you see a lot committed southerners (you know what that means) and they're getting very agitated the closer we get to the election. They're oiling and polishing their shotguns. I'm serious. Many of them are so hardcore and militant "conservative" that they're downright scary (think Dale Gribble on "King of the Hill"). They have been convinced by all the DVD's and E-mails that get circulated among that crowd that Obama's a Muslim with a secret agenda to overthrow the US, and there's going to be a bloodbath when Obama rallies his secret Muslim army, and the blacks are going to take over, etc. etc. etc.

Sure, a lot of it is indulgent hyperbole, but the violent sentiment is very real. With assholes like Limbaugh egging them on (Obama's the blue turbaned, third anti-Christ that Nostradamus warned us about, don't you know?), I wouldn't be surprised to see violence of some kind in the next two weeks.

Oh, much of Central Indiana is the same way. The things these people think and say will stun you.

Posted by: Luger Otter Robinson | October 23, 2008 9:12 PM

In only a minimally related item, I've just heard that CNN has reported that Scott McClellan has endorsed Barack Obama for president. It must be true; it's on wikipedia.

Posted by: James F | October 23, 2008 10:01 PM

#42

Can someone tell me who those Nobel winners are?

That's easy, there are none. Compare that to Project Steve, signed by both eligible Nobel Prize-winning Steves (Chu and Weinberg). Bachmann isn't even good at lying about ID.

Posted by: Ouchimoo | October 23, 2008 11:34 PM

Nice.

@Pity MN

Oh it gets better, keep digging. Huffington Post and DailyKos have dug up even more stuff. One of those lovely videos was Michele's infamous 'fool for jesus' speach. Right after that the preacher took the podium and ranted about how god gave them the right to preach politics in church.

Unfortunately, in the Pioneer Press she stated that she wasn't worried "As much as we would love to have the advertising, we have a strong budget; we have a strong plan,; we have strong poll data; and we can win this race without them anyway."

Yikes I hope she's just being naive or delusional!

Posted by: mayhempix | October 24, 2008 2:38 AM

Don't you see PZ? God is sacrificing Bachmann to atone for our atheistic abominations because he loves us. I can hardly wait until we hear how she is a poor victimized Christian thrown to the lions by the Un-Americans that have infiltrated the RNCC.

Posted by: Natalie | October 24, 2008 9:49 AM

Pity MN @ 42, Bachmann won because her district is gerrymandered to be very conservative.

Posted by: eddie | October 24, 2008 2:26 PM

A couple of points:

They are ditching bachmann but keeping palin? Huh?

All that money for palin's outfit when SNL clothes Tina for 1% the cost. Porkbarreling I tell ya!

Posted by: JBlilie | October 24, 2008 2:56 PM

Caribou Barbie! I love it! ROTFLMAO

Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | October 24, 2008 5:42 PM

Again, so, if Bachmann is axed by them just for doing the republican shuffle, what's taking them so long to axe others like Norm Coleman?

And what about all those other guys and gals out there across the country foaming at the mouth towing their party's schtick, and doing a mighty fine mistake-free job of it?

Ah, in Coleman's case, it must be because Franken's "image" as a weird sort of guy is still quite serviceable to those who know nothing else - absolutely NOTHING else - other than to cultivate fictional appearances and shape opinion by marketing them. Franken-as-boogeyman still has potential traction with the haters. So keep up Coleman's funding.

Otherwise, there's really no similarity between Coleman's lies and Bachmann's, is there? Guess, there's a "real difference" between some liars and other liars...

They dropped Bachmann like a hot potato just because her allure on the market tanked, not because she conducted herself like a deceitful liar. (At least TWICE, without making any "big mistake" as she claimed).

Far be it for the RNC to get distracted by non-political issues like that. Not even the tabloids want her, and they LIKE to run stories about Abominable Snowjobs. That's who they think they're targeting: people who buy tabloids. You know, "Real Americans".

These professionals really know what they're doin', you betcha...and it shows.

They look around for people who already have a certain "look", like casting directors or fashion model agencies, then groom likely-looking proto-schmucks for the political stage. They ask themselves, "Do they have "IT"? (Never EVER, what these people's credentials, experience, knowledge and intelligence are WITHOUT folding it into the batter of political-marketability context). Then they yank on the big fork-switch and the electricity hums and sputters and sparks fly and smoke appears, and the creature is created. IT'S ALIVE, IT'S ALIVE!!!

Given this election cycle, one recoils at the thought of what hideous monstrosity they come up with in 2012.

Posted by: df | October 24, 2008 6:25 PM

@ noyb #56

A vote for Bachmann is a vote for -

Lower taxes: For the rich!
Smaller government: But not cheaper, more efficient or more effective government.
Family values: Like hating gays and denying healthcare for children.
Personal freedoms: Like the freedom to be spied on by your government without a warrant.

Posted by: Groucho101 | October 24, 2008 10:28 PM

Sorry, missed your post about it earlier.

Posted by: df | October 26, 2008 5:12 PM

@ noyb #61

You're welcome. Now why don't you go troll the Associated Press for a while since they're running the same story?

Posted by: df | October 27, 2008 11:58 AM

@ noyb #63

What exactly does the NRCC press release prove? Do you honestly think they would publicly admit to pulling financial support from a Republican candidate? Of course they are going to deny it. Even an idiot like me can see that their decision not to fund Bachmann is political triage - they simply decided that Bachmann is unlikely to survive her self-inflicted wounds.

Posted by: byon | November 5, 2008 9:08 AM

Oh, look. Bachmann won BIG TIME. So much for the "flameout." So much for the lie that she was being abandoned.