WON IN IOWA. Not sure it will matter in the long run. The relevance of these early polls is mostly that they’re early. They don’t signify a large portion of the electorate, or even serve as particularly reliable bellweathers. But still…
Now, a lot of folks are going to moan on about Bachman because she’s religious. It astonishes me no more that in this country of all the nations of the world there are significant numbers of people who, if a politician goes to church more often than Christmas and Easter (or Rosh Hashona and Yom Kippur, or Eid, or whatever), all of a sudden they start moaning about the advancing theocracy. I’m not a big one for religion and politics in the same cart myself, but in my experience, most religious folk on the right just want to be left the hell alone. They wouldn’t be political if it weren’t for the virulent attacks on faith from the Left. And, having heard a good deal of what Bachman has said over the past couple-three years, she looks to me to be of that type. Yes, faith informs her politics. But — don’t kid yourself, bunky — the same is true of you. And if you try to deny it, I’m going to call you a liar to your face. Nobody has any proof on matters of God and everything, so we’re all operating on faith, and some folks ought to learn the humility to admit it — if only to themselves.
But here’s another thing for the faithless among us to consider: the faithful are a significant voting bloc in this country. Not monolithic, by any means, but, if your candidate cannot speak to them in their language, using terms that make them comfortable with ideas, it doesn’t matter how strong he or she may be otherwise, he can’t get elected. Remember, even Obama had to fake right on that.
However, I don’t see Bachman as a primarily religious candidate. And on the most important issues of the age — Obamacare, the debt, taxes, spending, defense, regulation, local rights — she is pitch-perfect right down the line. She is, after all, the evil tebagger queen who wouldn’t let Obama’s debt deal pass Congress unless there was a repeal of Obamacare attached. The Democrats said that was what made her stance a non-starter, but that was spin. That stance was what scare them shitless. And will continue to scare them shitless. And we also know the lady has spine, because She. Would. Not. Back. Down. Not even in the face of Weepin’ John Boehner’s best arm-twisting. Why not? Because she can’t be bought. Won’t take pork. Won’t take earmarks. The Left tries to say that makes her a do-nothing, but what they’re really complaining about is that she won’t play their corrupt game. She’s there to fix the problems that game has caused in Washington, and that’s what the business-as-usual pols can’t stand.
In closing, I must state clearly that this is not an endorsement of Bachman. The only possible candidate I could endorse this early is Sarah Palin. But Michele Bachman is a close second. The election is currently framed as belonging to ABO — Anybody but Obama — but I might add, we don’t need no steenking statists — which means no Romney, and no Huntsman. And I ain’t too sure about Rick Perry. That Ron Paul took second says the right things, I think, without going off the rails. The country is demanding an end to statism, and end to the almighty bureaucratic state, and a return to individual liberty, individual rights, and individual responsibility.
God willing, we might just get it.
Cross-posted at Eternity Road.