Recent Posts

Bill Prendergast

Trumped: Pocket of Resistance

by Bill Prendergast on January 18, 2017 · 0 comments


Script/Layouts: Bill Prendergast Art: Lupi McGinty




Script: Bill Prendergast Art: Will Dinski


Trumped: Death Star, Schmeath Star, We Already Won

by Bill Prendergast on January 17, 2017 · 0 comments


Script: Bill Prendergast Art: Will Dinski



Michele Bachmann: latest insane conspiracy theory…

by Bill Prendergast on October 8, 2013 · 1 comment

"The s**t's comin' down, people! SOON!*

“The s**t’s comin’ down, people! SOON!*

Michele Bachmann set another one of her nutty conspiracy theories loose again, accusing “President Obama of giving aid to Al Qaeda, which she said is proof that we are living in the Last Days.” This is getting a lotta play. Yo, check it out:

“This happened and as of today the United States is willingly, knowingly, intentionally sending arms to terrorists, now what this says to me, I’m a believer in Jesus Christ, as I look at the End Times scripture, this says to me that the leaf is on the fig tree and we are to understand the signs of the times, which is your ministry, we are to understand where we are in God’s end times history.”
“Rather than seeing this as a negative, we need to rejoice, Maranatha Come Lord Jesus, His day is at hand,” Bachmann continued. “When we see up is down and right is called wrong, when this is happening, we were told this; these days would be as the days of Noah.”

Isn’t Maranatha some kind of hippie brand of peanut butter? But she can’t be pimping peanut butter there: not if she really does believe the Lord’s Return is at hand, this time. Because she thinks it’s comin’ down, man: she was on this same program in September telling people that President Obama had embraced the Muslim Brotherhood’s plans for a global Islamic caliphate.
Anyway, this week’s report of impending apocalypse comes from Brian Tashman at Right Wing Watch. Tashmann also explains why Michele’s charge against the President is (as usual) absolute B.S. (The “arms” being sent are non-lethal equipment used for defense against chemical weapons attacks; the people who will receive them are vetted anti-Assad Syrian rebels — not “terrorists” and not — surprise! — Al-Qaeda.)
For more screwball Bachmann, read on:

{ 1 comment }

michele-mirrorLast week I read the independent counsel’s report regarding acts allegedly committed by members of Michele Bachmann’s presidential campaign staff. Reading the report gave me the impression that the independent counsel who wrote it secretly believes that Michele Bachmann hired a secretive clique of lying d-bags to occupy key positions at the very heart of her political operation.
The independent counsel doesn’t actually say or conclude that. That’s just my impression of what he seems to merely suggest. And if you look at the evidence he gathered and his comments on that evidence — you might conclude that too, the same way I did.
Many of these staffers had been active in conservative/Christian conservative politics before joining the Bachmann For President team. This means that anyone who claims to have any faith in the integrity of the Christian Right and Michele Bachmann will find the documents and interview summaries collected for this report — alarming. (But how would you persuade a conservative Christian to read it?)
The report focuses on alleged misconduct by Bachmann’s Iowa campaign chair, former State Senator Kent Sorenson. But in examining that, the independent counsel’s investigation raises serious questions about the agendas, motives, and conduct of many other key players around Bachmann. Some of them were senior campaign advisers and staffers.
For now, let’s limit ourselves to just one question: did Iowa State Senator Sorenson deceive Michele Bachmann and defect to Ron Paul’s campaign in return for some kind of “bribe?”


Michele Bachmann: the “tell all” book about her

by Bill Prendergast on September 27, 2013 · 2 comments

michele-mirrorI don’t believe there is such a thing as “essential human dignity,” because I have attended “open mic” nights at cafes and heard people singing their own original folk songs. But if you require further evidence of our degraded human condition, you will find it in “Bachmannistan: Behind the Lines” by Peter Waldron and John Gilmore.
The authors themselves don’t seem to understand how much they’re confessing about Republican politics, American conservatives, and the Christian Right. The authors don’t even seem to understand how much they’re confessing about *themselves.*
The chief source for events is co-author Peter Waldron, who directed evangelical outreach during Bachmann’s presidential campaign. Other Bachmann insiders also provided material (longtime Bachmann political advisor Andy Parrish seems to have contributed recollections appearing in early chapters.)
So when the authors recount ‘the scene where Michele and Marcus Bachmann are at home one night in their Stillwater, Minnesota bedroom’ — the scene in which Marcus Bachmann lays in bed looking on as Michele Bachmann stares at herself in a full length mirror, saying: “I am the President of the United States” — I feel fairly sure that that actually happened. (See the original illustration I have created to represent this scene, above.) I feel fairly sure that either Michele or Marcus confided ‘the claim she made to the mirror’ to one of their political allies, in the hope that this otherwise private moment would somehow impress the listener. Which is funny, given the fact that so many of us will find the image either entirely ridiculous or somewhat disturbing.


Michele Bachmann: soaking the sucker supporters…

by Bill Prendergast on August 5, 2013 · 3 comments

Bachmann_piss_offMichele Bachmann has always enjoyed the enthusiastic support of conservative voters around the country. They love her, and very often they express that love in the form of small donations to her campaigns and causes. And in election cycle after election cycle, those small donations from “regular folks” conservatives added up to such a large pile of money that Bachmann soon became the envy of other members of Congress when it came to fundraising.
Michele’s “regular folks” donors gave to her political action committee, which is called MICHELEPAC. That name is an acronym; the letters in MICHELEPAC stand for “Many Individual Conservatives Helping Elect Leaders Everywhere” Political Action Committee. It’s cute, see? And it led Michele’s “regular folks” fans and donors to believe that the donations they sent to that PAC would be used to promote the election of more “conservatives like Michele.” In fact, Michele herself told them that that is what their small donations would be used for.
But now ThinkProgress has spoiled everything by pointing out the following:
1. Bachmann’s running this “donate your money so Michele can get other conservative candidates into leadership positions” PAC, taking money from “regular folks” conservatives for that purpose…
2. …and in the first half of 2013, Michele’s PAC spent more than $250,000 of the money donated…
#. …but out of that $250,000 — only $400 went to supporting other political candidates.
…What the hell, you ask, did Michele’s PAC spend the rest of that $250,000 on?


bachmannpraysThe Christian Right claims it represents God’s moral agenda. Whether you’re intimidated, appalled, or energized by that claim: you ought to read the pdf document at this link. (It’s a collection of evidence related to the recent Heki v. Bachmann lawsuit, collected and posted online by the Iowa Republican.)
The document is a rare glimpse of the day-to-day morality actually observed by political leaders and operatives of the Christian Right. In these pages, former Bachmann For President campaign staffers Barb Heki and Pastor Peter Waldron (and others) detail allegations of serious misconduct by Michele Bachmann and some of her senior staffers during and after her presidential campaign. Specific incidents and conversations are recalled: in other words, a lot of this is “the story that the media didn’t tell you about.”


bachmann06Today’s the Fourth of July. A good day to meditate on history: its uses and abuses.
This morning one of Michele Bachmann’s “greatest hits” showed up in my search: a news account of her statements at 2011 Republican rally in New Hampshire:

(Bachmann told the audience) that the next generation of Americans will ask its elders what they did to prevent the shifting of the tax burden to them, just as her generation asked their parents what they did to prevent the premeditated murder of Europe’s Jews.
“I tell you this story because I think in our day and time, there is no analogy to that horrific action” the Holocaust, she said. “But only to say, we are seeing eclipsed in front of our eyes a similar death and a similar taking away. It is this disenfranchisement that I think we have to answer to.”
Bachmann’s comments were condemned by Holocaust survivors.



bachmann-screamVia a truly incredible feat of reasoning, Eric Ostermeier of Smart Politics and the Humphrey School of Public Affairs has concluded the following:

Bachmann’s Little Secret: Not Fixated on God, Guns, and Gays
by Eric Ostermeier on July 1, 2013
Only one per cent of the congresswoman’s nearly 600 press releases since 2007 have focused on the “3 Gs” collectively, as well as just one percent on abortion.

As you see, the basis for Ostermeier’s conclusion is his examination of years of Bachmann press releases. I think this is the first time I have ever seen any political analyst assert that a politician’s actual agenda can be reliably determined from examination of their press releases. I’ve read a lot of nonsense in political commentary over the years. But this truly byzantine effort to win readers over to an insupportable view–this outdoes anything I’ve ever read. We’re talking “dead parrot sketch” logic here…and it’s being presented by an outfit that calls itself “Smart Politics!”
Ostermeier reaches his “contrarian” conclusion (that Bachmann’s political agenda is *not* fixated on “God, guns and gays”) by giving serious consideration and weight to only one kind of evidence: Bachmann press releases. His choice of methodology is almost certainly the worst way to determine *any* political figure’s actual agenda. (Would it have been wise for a political analyst to try to speak decisively to the issue of Lyndon Johnson’s “real agenda” regarding Viet Nam–by focusing almost entirely on the statements in LBJ’s press releases and taking them at their word?)