Apr 21, 2015:
Recently, former U.S. Congresswoman and Republican candidate for the U.S. Presidency in 2012 Michelle Bachmann was a guest on the "Understanding the Times with Jan Markell" radio program discussing "end times".
Two one-hour segments were aired: "Part 1: Lawlessness and Global Transformation: How it Sets the Stage" on April 11, 2015, and "Lawlessness & Global Transformation: How it Sets the Stage – Part 2" on April 18, 2015.
Below is a list of notable quotes from the program (all quotes from Bachmann, except where noted).
Regarding the legacy of President Obama:
I believe that his greatest legacy will be the establishment of lawlessness in the United States
Regarding the White House attitude towards the recent address to the U.S. Congress by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:
President Obama didn't want the truth about his very bad deal with Iran to be disclosed, and he knew that no more powerful voice in the world would tell the truth about this very bad deal to give Iran a nuclear weapon than Netanyahu.
What Bachmann said to Netanyahu when she met him briefly at the end of the address;
Thank you, prime minster. Finally, someone has told the truth to the world about this very bad deal with Iran getting a nuclear weapon.
What program host Jan Markell said about Netanyahu's concern about radical Islam (in this instance, Iran) obtaining a nuclear weapon:
That makes perfect sense, other than to, what appears to be the Obama Administration, which is dead set on capitulating and appeasing the mullahs in Iran.
Bachmann's belief about how soon Iran might have a nuclear weapon:
It won't be ten years, it will be far sooner than that. I believe it could even be within one year.
Bachmann's belief about how he is helping Iran acquire a nuclear weapon:
President Obama, the American President, for the first time is doing everything he can to move mountains to insure that the radical mullahs in Iran achieve their dream which is a nuclear weapon.
Regarding Obama's power as President:
And no President has ever stretched the boundaries of power within office like Barack Obama. He has now gone to the level of lawlessness, taking power into his hands that he has no constitutional right to take that power.
Regarding where Obama stands as far as "radical" U.S. Presidents:
Here we have the most radical President that has ever been in the history of America, and he has completely gotten his way, 110%, unmitigated, for all eight years...It really comes down to, I believe, world view and idealogy - what is the world view that you hold. We see that Barack Obama has probably one of the most radical ideologies of anyone to ever occupy the White House. He embraces the ideas of a economic Markist who believes in full-on redistribution of wealth. But he also embraces the world view when it comes to foreign policy, of essentially a one-world government point of view, where he is not as concerned about United States sovereignty, he's very willing to see the United States power flow into world organizations, and he has taken an opposite view of Israel, unlike any other President that we have ever had since 1948 - his view is anti-Israel. We've never seen that before. So that now, in effect, declared war on Israel from the United States.
Regarding Israel and The Bible:
We take as true what the Bible says in Genesis, about Israel, and about nations' response to Israel. We recognize that we have been singularly blessed in the United States, because of the way the United States has blessed Israel over and over from 1948 until recent times. We also know that this isn't a one-sided view in The Bible. The Bible talks about blessing. It also talks about cursing. We recognize that God is true and his ways are all-together just. And if the United States turns its back on Israel, as our President is doing today in my opinion, we cannot continue to indulge in the fantasy that the United States will be free from receiving the negative blow-back, or curses in biblical parlance, that could come our way - it could be severe.
Read a transcript of Netanyahu's March 3, 2015 address to the U.S. Congress here
More:
Commentary:
I take issue with Michelle on her comments about Obama and the pending Iran nuclear deal. The concept of the deal is to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon not help Iran obtain one as Michelle and others seem to think. The U.S. State Department clearly states it's goals in the Iran nuclear talks in a media note dated April 2, 2015 entitled "Parameters for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran's Nuclear Program".
Regarding Jan's comment that Obama is "dead set on capitulating and appeasing the mullahs in Iran", I say no, that's not what the Obama administration is doing. Obama is trying to put together a real-life, practical, workable, solution to the problem - a solution that will hopefully come to fruition and help avoid a possible future war with Iran.
Regarding her comment that Obama is "the most radical President that has ever been in the history of America, and he has completely gotten his way, 110%, unmitigated, for all eight years", I say it depends on how you define the word "radical". But, in my opinion, former President George W. Bush was by far more "radical" than Obama by involving the United States in a long, drawn-out war with Iraq and all the consequences of that war. And surely, Obama has not "completely gotten his way, 110%, unmitigated, for all eight years". There are many, many things Obama wanted and tried to do but didn't get because of push-back from Republicans - the "public" option for healthcare and an immigration reform bill from the House of Representatives, to name two.
Regarding her comment that Obama "embraces the ideas of a economic Markist who believes in full-on redistribution of wealth", I say she is grossly misstating Obama's beliefs. Income and wealth inequality is a serious concern in the United States. What exactly Michelle means by "full-on" I don't know, but raising taxes by increasing the Social Security cap from $118,500 to $200,000 or $250,000 and the benefits of that increase to tens of millions of Americans seems like a reasonable, effective way to extend the solvency of Social Security for many years to come.
Regarding her comment "We take as true what the Bible says in Genesis, about Israel, and about nations' response to Israel.", I say who exactly do you mean by "We"? All Americans, all Christians, or some other group(s)? We (all Americans) live in a country that recognizes and supports freedom of religion. In my opinion, Michelle is treading on very "shaky" ground by using the Bible to help dictate her foreign policy. Just because Michelle is a Christian and obviously believes in the Bible does not mean her religious beliefs should be dictating policy decisions, policy decisions that would affect all Americans (if she were President), regardless of her personal religious beliefs. Policy decisions, foreign or otherwise, should be based on facts and the "real world", not religious beliefs. Does she not understand the concept of "Separation of Church and State"?
Regarding her comment "And if the United States turns its back on Israel, as our President is doing today in my opinion, we cannot continue to indulge in the fantasy that the United States will be free from receiving the negative blow-back, or curses in biblical parlance, that could come our way - it could be severe.", I ask the question, "If Michelle were President of the United States, would you want her to make foreign policy decisions about Israel based on her belief and fear, taken from the Bible, that not fully-supporting Israel might cause "negative blow-back" or "curses" on the Untied States?
To summarize, I think that Michelle exaggerates and mischaracterize quite often in her discussion with Jan. Whether she does this knowingly for political effect, or if she really does believe that strongly, only she knows. Michelle's comments involving religion sound like she believes more in a theocracy and not so much in a democracy.
What I know is that we live in a "brave new world", and we can't think and behave the same way we have in the past. It's going to take progressive, global thinking to help the United States, and all countries of the world survive, prosper, and live together on this planet. Michelle Bachmann's ideas and beliefs are old and based way too much on her religious beliefs, and I for one am relieved she did not become President of the United States!