海角大神

Obamacare 鈥渒ills.鈥� That鈥檚 what Rep. Michele Bachmann (R) of Minnesota said Thursday on the floor of the House. In a fire-breathing speech, the tea party favorite and former GOP presidential hopeful urged her fellow lawmakers to 鈥渞epeal this failure before it literally kills women, kills children, kills senior citizens."

Congress should not go along with that, said Representative Bachmann. 鈥淟et鈥檚 love people. Let鈥檚 care about people. Let鈥檚 repeal it now while we can.鈥�

Later, she came back on the floor and added that Medicaid, the big federal/state health entitlement program for lower-income Americans, is a 鈥済hetto."

OK, in terms of political rhetoric this is going pretty far. Bachmann has long been kind of a bomb thrower. But even in that context, this is nuclear, isn鈥檛 it?

Well, we鈥檝e got a couple of comments here. The first is that political debate over the Affordable Care Act specifically and health care in general has long been rhetorically charged.

Remember when Sarah Palin and others in the GOP charged that President Obama鈥檚 reforms would create 鈥渄eath panels鈥� ruling on which seniors get what care? It鈥檚 not far from that to 鈥渒ills." So, in that sense, Bachmann is within the stream of her party鈥檚 thought, if not exactly the mainstream.

Liberals are outraged at what they feel are these exaggerations. The alleged 鈥渄eath panel鈥� meme came from the law鈥檚 inclusion of various boards intended to judge the cost-effectiveness of certain treatments, for instance. But prior to the bill鈥檚 passage, a few Dems did edge out on that limb themselves, charging that people would die from lack of care, if it didn鈥檛 pass.

We鈥檙e not saying there is strict equivalence here. We鈥檙e just saying the law has, um, always raised strong feelings.

Second, the conservative wing of the Republican Party is pretty annoyed about the Affordable Care Act at the moment. In particular, they鈥檙e angry that many House and Senate Republicans, by voting for the short-term continuing resolution that funds the government for the rest of the fiscal year, have voted to continue Obamacare鈥檚 implementation.

They think it鈥檚 so important to block the law that the GOP, as a whole, should have shut down the government in that effort.

Influential conservative blogger Erick Erickson has been big on this, charging on the RedState blog that if a Republican voted for the CR鈥檚 final passage, that lawmaker voted to support Obamacare, even if, before that, he or she cast a ballot for an amendment that would have defunded the law.

On Friday he has reposted a list of senators who, he said, have done just that.

鈥淚f any one of those senators tells you they did not vote to fund Obamacare, or, in fact, voted against funding Obamacare, they are being mendacious,鈥� .

Lastly, Bachmann may be trying to distract the political world from the other stuff she鈥檚 been saying recently. In a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference last week, she charged that Mr. Obama has a 鈥渓avish lifestyle鈥� in the White House that includes 鈥渇ive chefs on Air Force One,鈥� as well as two live-in projectionists for the White House movie theater and that 鈥渨e pay someone to walk the president鈥檚 dog."

The chefs and projectionists don鈥檛 exist. We wouldn鈥檛 rule out staffers holding Bo鈥檚 leash, but there is no pro pet sitter on the White House payroll.

Confronted by a CNN camera crew and asked to explain herself, Bachmann literally bolted. Conservative Fox News host Bill O鈥橰eilly earlier this week slammed Bachmann for being trivial and distracting attention from the real problem of the national debt.

At CPAC, Bachmann also said that Alzheimer鈥檚 disease could be cured if not for government regulations, taxes, and lawyers. She added that 70 percent of every food stamp dollar goes to 鈥渂ureaucrats."

the former claim 鈥減ants on fire鈥� false, saying researchers blame the disease itself and lack of research funding for the fact that no cure yet exists.

And the food stamp assertion? Not true either. assigned it 鈥渇our Pinocchios," his worst rating.

鈥淭here really aren鈥檛 enough Pinocchios for such misleading use of statistics in a major speech,鈥� he writes.