CNN’s Dana Loesch wants to know why Romney won’t hit that. Precisely, she wants to know why he won’t back Michele Bachmann up on her Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theory, under the guise of free speech. Yes, Dana said this today, the day after the mass shooting that is being investigated as a hate crime against a group often mistaken for Muslims.
Here’s CNN’s “conservative” voice, trying to provoke Romney into hopping on the Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy wagon of their party, from the August 6 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Glenn Beck Program courtesy of Media Matters:
Upset that Mitt Romney is refusing to delve into the critical to national security issue of Chick-fil-A losing their freedom to hate because some Americans chose to exercise their right to spend their money as they see fit, the gang sees Romney’s refusal to comment on the Bachmann conspiracy as a huge betrayal.
Dana beseeched the Heavens, “Why on Earth, why, that’s — that’s a homerun, why wouldn’t you it that?”
Dana then put on her pretend adviser hat and came up with this sparkling bit of political spin for Romney, “I’m not advising him, which I’m not –he couldn’t afford me (oh, I beg to differ, Dana), but if I was, it just seems so easy (I bet it does) to do, like, if they’re asking him what is your thought on the Chick-fil-A story, what do you think about the Michele Bachmann and the Muslim Brotherhood, he could say, ‘I don’t have a problem with free speech, DO YOU?’ (Dana very pleased with her relative cleverness here — score!) and the reports, that report, that inquiry that Congresswoman Bachmann, that they presented toward Congress, raised a lot of questions. Ah. Who’s against free speech?!”
I don’t suppose Dana really wants us to answer that question.
Dana mislabels Bachmann’s accusations as “raising questions about the Muslim Brotherhood”. Of course, “raising questions” is not exactly the same thing as writing a government agency to demand an investigation based on nothing but delusions based on someone’s ethnicity. A refresher:
Bachmann and four other House Republicans wrote a letter asking the Department of Defense, the State Department, and other departments to investigate whether the U.S. government is being infiltrated by Muslim extremists. In particular they said that Huma Abedin, deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “has three family members—her late father, her mother, and her brother—connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. Her position provides her with routine access to the Secretary and to policy-making.”
A pause while we right the tilted ship of “raising questions” and “free speech” that only works one way for conservatives; no one can “ask questions” about Chick Fil A or Romney’s tax returns, but they can call for a McCarthyesque investigation of US citizens under the guise of “asking questions”. Shudder.
Poor Dana is wondering why Romney the cowardly chameleon won’t answer questions about Bachmann’s conspiracy theory. Well, Dana, it’s like this: Mitt Romney won’t answer questions about anything, sweetie.
Romney won’t answer questions about his tax returns except to demand that we believe him, even though he’s lied in the past about his tax returns and did so while taking a public stance that we ought to believe him and how dare anyone question him.
Romney won’t condemn Bachmann’s McCarthyism just like he can’t stand up to Rush Limbaugh or Ted Nugent or Donald Trump. This sad clown posse of hate runs the Republican Party to such a degree that a presidential candidate can’t risk taking a stand against them. Romney takes orders from Rush, Ted and the Donald on matters of great importance, like who to hate. If you’ve been paying attention, that’s everyone who has ever stood up to them or had a thought of their own (women, gays, union members, teachers, firefighters, people who go to Batman movies, people who wear hoodies, people who don’t practice the right kind of Christianity, people who are not conservatives, ETC.).
Poor Dana should know better than to start let us count the ways Mitt Romney won’t answer questions. Mitt Romney is a weak candidate whose answer to Bachmann’s specific brand of feverish, true believer hatred is “I’m not going to tell people what to talk about.” Way to put out those fires, Romney.
Even Bush did better than that. In retrospect, he appears a bumbling but charming buffoon when placed in contrast with today’s conservatives.
No one asked Romney to tell people what to talk about. They asked him about Bachmann’s call to investigate American citizens.
Dana thinks Romney should embrace Bachmann’s Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy because “it’s a home run”. But then, no one has accused Dana of being bright. Perhaps I can make Dana’s day by reminding her that all is not lost. Back in 2008, Mitt Romney sided firmly with Glenn Beck against the imaginary Islamic caliphate takeover of this country, and warned that Iran was coming for us.
Ever the etch-a-sketch, Romney stood there in his tux condemning the foreign policy “elites”, which might explain why Romney stumbled his way through his 2012 ‘Mitt the Twit’ Ken Doll goes on a foreign policy tour. Maybe he thought if he really made a fool of himself, no one would notice that he was staffed with…
Bush foreign policy elites. Yes, the same “elites” salivating at the thought taxpayer money for corporate “security” contracts.
Not to undermine the fear-mongering, but it’s been at least four years of promises that Iran was going to bomb us NOW. Are they wrong yet? Because it could be suggested that if accumulating weapons of mass destruction, like, I dunno, assault weapons, is a sign of imminent attack, then shouldn’t we all be taking cover from Dana’s party? Would it be fair to say that they are gathering weapons and they have already established that they hate us for our freedoms and want to ruin our way of life, and so —
Just “asking questions” here, though I am not currently in a position to demand an investigation of Dana and her possible affiliations with neo Nazi white supremacists. (No proof? Dana doesn’t care about proof, remember? There is no proof that Huma Abedin is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, either. Inflammatory? Sort of like accusing someone of being affiliated with terrorists?) Pardon me, I was just trying to ‘restore the Anglo-Saxon understanding’ of their ‘special relationship’.
Certainly you’d think that anyone fear-mongering about Iran wouldn’t be pallin’ around with terrorists, and yet, the John Birch society Koch brothers, who pledged $400 million to defeat President Obama (and have ties to Freedom Works, Americans for Prosperity, and the Tea Party) sold millions of dollars in petrochemical equipment to Iran, and violated a U.S. trade ban on selling materials to Iran to do so.
Yes, they knew about it and they contorted their dealings in order to get around the ban:
A Bloomberg Markets investigation has found that Koch Industries — in addition to being involved in improper payments to win business in Africa, India and the Middle East — has sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to Iran, a country the U.S. identifies as a sponsor of global terrorism.
Internal company records show that Koch Industries used its foreign subsidiary to sidestep a U.S. trade ban barring American companies from selling materials to Iran. Koch-Glitsch offices in Germany and Italy continued selling to Iran until as recently as 2007, the records show.
The Kochs say they sidestepped the law using subsidiaries for the sales. Their statement sounds so Romney ‘I’m not going to release my tax returns but I paid lots of taxes’, “Koch-Glitsch had protocols in place that were consistent with applicable U.S. laws allowing such sales at the foreign subsidiary level.”
Uh huh. You won’t see Romney standing up to the Koch Brothers or turning down their fundraisers or their millions of tainted petrochemical sales to Iran dollars. Pal around with terrorists, you rich white boys. It’s all good. See, no one suspects YOU, because you are above the law by nature of your inherent, God-given privilege. We wouldn’t dare ask questions…
So, hey, Dana should relax. Mitt Romney will do as he is told. He just can’t tell her that out loud because he’s supposed to be etch-a-sketching to the middle now. If Bachmann wants to use the power of the U.S. government to terrorize American citizens over their ethnicity (or, more specifically, apparent lack of compliance with white Christian conservatives due to skin color and religion), wimp Romney certainly won’t tell her what to talk about.
How could he? Romney’s waiting for Rush Limbaugh to tell him what to talk about. Don’t you get it, Dana? You and your crazy conspiracy ridden pals are driving the prancing horse. Dig your heel in on the Right side, Dana, and Romney will obey.
Ms. Jones is the co-founder/ editor-in-chief of PoliticusUSA and a member of the White House press pool.
Sarah hosts Politicus News and co-hosts Politicus Radio. Her analysis has been featured on several national radio, television news programs and talk shows, and print outlets including Stateside with David Shuster, as well as The Washington Post, The Atlantic Wire, CNN, MSNBC, The Week, The Hollywood Reporter, and more.
Sarah is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.