« Is Pollution the Solution? | Main | Of Medicare & Medicaid & Whether PIIGS Have Wings »

Wednesday, July 13, 2011



So is Michelle Bachmann strong or just...well an outspoken woman that has a mutual crush with the camera. I would guess being strong would have to include a "strong" track record of crafting legislation and victories.

Out of curiosity professor, what do you see as the right qualification for being a powerful congressional delegate. If it's based on media appearance, god help us all.


For the record, it's me posting, not Dr. Blanchard. The claim I made here was that Bachmann was a strong woman, not necessarily that she was a strong candidate.

If being a strong woman takes passing legislation, then most women are weak. I don't think it takes that.

I do think it takes strength to stand up to a vitriolic press, to stand firmly for your principles while under attack, to run your own business, to give birth to five children and to successfully win a bid for Congress.

On her record: Representatives do more than just pass legislation. Part of the role of a legislator is to say no to bad legislation. Bachmann may not have passed legislation while the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, but she has certainly done a good job of saying "no" when it is needed. You are also forgetting that Bachmann has, in fact, authored a good deal of legislation in Minnesota. At least eighteen of the bills and resolutions she authored have passed.

Ken Blanchard

Hans: I am in complete agreement with Miranda on this one. Whatever one thinks of Bachmann's legislative record, she has pushed herself to national attention in a very short while.

Elison's words quoted above suggest a small mind and a smaller imagination. Any Democrat could have said the same thing at any time in the last thirty years, and that without knowing a single Republican. All he had to do was listen to his fellow Democrats.

Greg Lang

Kieth Ellison speech at Kathleen Ann Soliah/Sara Jane Olson-Peterson fundraiser. UNGAGGED Forum held on February 12, 2000

Keith Ellison's Speech

(As edited by the SODC under the supervision of Keith Ellison.)

UNGAGGED Forum held on February 12, 2000


Good evening, thanks for inviting me. Let me say that I think there�s an idea that young people are not attuned to the 60's. And, that the 60's and 70's are ancient history. That they've passed and they�re gone. I want to submit to you that I can't accept that as reality. I want to submit to you that the 90's and 80's are nothing but part 2 of the 60�s and the 70's. And, I suggest that to you because of the few things that we can observe.

Don't you remember Quibilah Shabazz, the daughter of Malcolm X, was prosecuted in retribution against Minister Farrakhan - this game that was played out? Jijaga Pratt recently released. Ruben Carter recently released. Mumia Abu Jamal. For the people who want to incarcerate Sara Jane Olson, ain't nothing changed.

As a matter of fact, they want to settle scores with Sara Jane Olson and others who were fighting for freedom in the 60's and 70's. What I'm saying to you is that, really, the 60's and the 70�s were only a blip in the data in the minds of the people who govern this society that we live in. To the powerful,they were an aberration. They were a time when people came together: people coming out of World War II; black people needing to have some rights in the country after having 400 years of oppression, slavery, and segregation; white people coming to a realization that it's better to be a part of humanity than over humanity. This was a confluence of a time when people came together and DID beat back the things that America was always based on. In the minds of the people who want to prosecute Sara Jane Olson, these people feel that the gains that we made have got to be beat back, and the very idea of, say for instance, black people having civil rights, has got to be obliterated with (obviously) the criminal justice system and incarceration. Think about what it means to a whole population when a significant number - 1/3 of all the men-are going to one time be incarcerated - what impact does it have on the 2/3's that aren�t? [reference to Bernardine Dohrn's citation that 1 in 3 black males born today will spend at least some portion of their life in prison.] It�s like an anchor on a very small boat. You understand what I'm saying? The idea that the people who want to prosecute Sara Jane Olson have, well,they have a "June Cleaver" concept of what women are supposed to be about. They have a "June Cleaver" idea that Sara Jane Olson, women in general, were supposed to be in the kitchen cooking -SOMETHING. Right? And are NOT supposed to be engaged in political protest, laying out political thought, and certainly not breaking out of some concrete stereotype or image that they had. In the 60's, when we fought for public housing: housing for people to live in, not shanty shacks or sugar ditches, and ghettos in Detroit, Chicago, so on. When we fought for public housing and extended housing for poor people, this is offensive to the type, to the mentality that would prosecute Sara Jane Olson, which is why, when the 14 pastors over there in North Minneapolis stood in front of the bulldozers, they had to be prosecuted. You understand what I'm saying? So what I�m submitting to you is that this is just a later chapter. We should not let them put the 60's in some sort of historical time warp. And that it�s clear that whatever we may make of the 60's and 70's, that the people who want to prosecute Sara Jane Olson have not forgot about anything. Bernardine made the point better than anyone so far. This is not about justice. This is not about accountability, this is not about public safety. THIS is about SYMBOLISM. This is about MAKING A POINT. This is about saying to you and to me that we are going to get you if you ever try to stand against what we're about. WE�RE GOING TO GET YOU. And we�re going to lock you up and we don't care how long it takes, we're going to get you. There might be people who get book deals, or there might be private revenge, there might be all these things, but no prosecution like this would really float unless it had a very important, symbolic meaning that tied it together for the people involved in it. And it is the idea that the people who fought for social justice and to elevate humanity in the 60's and 70's were WRONG! They were wrong and we're going to prove it because we're going TO LOCK HER UP. That's what it's about. You know, I was asked to speak about white crime hysteria and black gangs. I'm a trial lawyer. I tried five cases since October, and I can tell you this, there are some startling similarities between my client and Sara Jane Olson. Let's start with being a member of a stigmatized and vilified group, so stigmatized, so vilified, that if you even mention their name in association with this particular defendant, then conviction is all but guaranteed. This person is a Blood, they're a Vice Lord, they�re a Gangster Disciple, they are a 4-corner hustler, whatever, and unless you're willing to dig in there and seriously get down there with this case you might as well start talking about, "Well, the sentencing guidelines say that if you plead guilty to this... [Laughter].... you know...we might be able to shave off a few months here or there." Do you understand what I'm saying? My point is that I remember the SLA. [I was 12-years-old when it hit the news in 1974]. I remember the name, I remember the made-for-TV movie with Patty Hearst who was "taken away by the SLA" and by this black guy named Cinque, who strutted around and was real scary. And clearly these people were "bad to the bone." And as I began to read about the SLA, they were talking about rights for poor people... I mean I'm not trying to say the SLA is - I don't even know enough about the SLA to tell you about the SLA, but I can tell you what they stated what they were in FAVOR OF: it had to do with fighting poverty and fighting racism and stuff like that. I'm not even here to tell you how they did it because I don't know. But I can tell you what they (the government) claim they have stood for, has not even met the light of day in this whole conversation. What are they FOR? What are they about? It's the same way with MY clients, the groups they're involved in. Nobody ever knows what it means to BE a Blood, because they�ve already said this is "just evil." That's ALL you need to know. "They�re bad." And same with the SLA. The SLA has been completely vilified and we know nothing about it. Absolutely NOTHING. They don't tell us ANYTHING about these organizations; just the label is good enough. The expense my clients go through, now you would think if you watch television (which is the worst place to get information about anything) you would really be under the impression that all black gang members have a �big gangster knot of cash� in their pockets derived from massive sales of drugs. The last two years that I have been in private practice, I can tell you that I am living proof that they ain't got any money! These folks scrimp and save, and you know who shows up at their trial? Their mama.

Who said mama? You are dead on. Mama. Maybe baby's mama. But never the crew. They're not there. My clients have their parents borrow money, scrimp, save, do exactly what you're doing - have fund raisers, maybe sell plates of BBQ chicken so Junior can get an attorney. And like many of my clients, Sara Jane Olson has a public defender. Do you understand what I'm saying? Because she cannot afford to pay for her defense all by herself. Do you understand what I'm saying? I mean the reality is, Sara Jane Olson, basically - is a black gang member - as far as I can see. [much applause] On my way over here, those of you from the Twin Cities know that certain parts of town mean this, and certain parts of town mean that. Well, I�m from North Minneapolis and you're you all know what that's supposed to mean if you're from Minneapolis, and I had a hard time finding my way over here because I don't get over here that much, but you know, what I found as I got over here...that the barriers that we build between each other are really barriers of the mind and ones we create, because in a lot of the cases that I've represented people in, I've seen people like Marv Davidov [long-time local activist] there, and the defense committee for the person, and other folks in this room and I think, just like the people who want to come together and lock up Sara, WE need to come together and free Sara. And all the Sara's because she's not the only one. I am praying that Castro does not get to the point where he has to really barter with these guys over here because they're going to get Assata Shakur, they�re going to get a whole lot of other people, they just want to get them so badly. They just want to throw them away. And so, I hope the Cuban people can stick to it because the freedom of some good decent people depends on it. We do live in a society of cynical �personal responsibility-type� lingo. You've heard people say "personal responsibility." That's what everyone is into. They don't mean them. They mean YOU. They mean OTHER PEOPLE need to take responsibility. Do you understand what I mean? They mean other people. And it might be because they're overworked and underpaid - there�s probably good reasons for it...Part of this idea is that people are actually upset with women because they are out in the work force. And people don't know that most men and women would like to be home with their families and are forced out there because of the corporate culture that we live in, because it takes two to earn a wage for a family these days. We live in a society of blame, we live in a society where most people want to point their finger at you or at me, or make me or you are personally responsible, [when] really [they] need to point to the government and the corporate culture we live in and make them responsible. So I'm going to sit down now, but I'm going to ask you to understand and remember that the fight that we're engaged in to support Sara Jane Olson is a worthy one, that's it's worth your time and it's worth your money and that, while TV and the popular media is pushing the aesthetics of the 1960�s and 70's, that "70's SHOW," you know, haven't you seen the imagery all over? They don't want to push the POLITICS. We need to pull the politics into the equation, because I'm telling you, believe me when I tell you, one reason they're incarcerating all these young black men, because they know it was all these young black men who sat down. Right? In the 60's, you know? It was young black men and women who freed Nelson Mandela in South Africa. They know that it was young black men with young white men, Native American; all of us who created the movement that literally changed the entire society that we live in. And it's going to take us all to create a culture of freedom. And so, I just want to welcome you for your contribution to the struggle and thank those of you who have been maintaining the struggle over the years, and say, "Hey, free Sara!"


Thanks, Dr. Blanchard.

And thanks, Greg, for the transcript. What was the original source?


Michelle Bachman not a strong woman? Hasn't she run her own prosperous business? Who is stronger, Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin who have records of accomplishment in the private sector as well as running and winning elected office or say Hillary Clinton who has more or less tied herself to the rising star of her husband and has essentially depended on that to get where she is? Hillary wins nothing if she could not run on the coat-tails of her husband.

Greg Lang

Before her final conviction Kathleen Ann Soliah/Sara Jane Olson-Peterson had a website http://www.SaraOlsondefense.org. The Keith Ellison speech was first posted
on the former website a few weeks after the Ellison speech.

Bill Fleming

duggerSD, Hillary Clinton is Secretary of State of the most powerful nation on the planet. She withstood incredible humiliation at the hands of her husband and the GOP congress and came out a national hero.

That's no coat tails deal.

Sarah Palin on the other hand quit her job when times got tough and is beholden by her faith do do what her husband tells her to do. The two women aren't even remotely comparable when it comes to measuring their courage.

That's exactly why Bachmann is in and Palin out, even among the Tea Party people.

Bill Fleming

Sarah Palin:

Hillary Clinton:


Bachmann has no chance of becoming president. None.


3rd Party,

"Bachmann has no chance of becoming president. None."

That is one of the most convincing arguements I have come across so far. Thank You so much for the info.

George Mason

Bill; Hillary Clinton suffered humiliation at the hands of her husband because he was the source of her power. Bill Clintons continued popularity among liberals is symptomatic of the overweening lust for power exhibited by HRC. Instead of dumping the sleazebag she clung to him desperately because he owned her ladder. Without Slick HRC would not be SoS she would be forgotten.

George Mason

Bill; Hillary Clinton suffered humiliation at the hands of her husband because he was the source of her power. Bill Clintons continued popularity among liberals is symptomatic of the overweening lust for power exhibited by HRC. Instead of dumping the sleazebag she clung to him desperately because he owned her ladder. Without Slick HRC would not be SoS she would be forgotten.


She banned the movie Aladdin from her charter school because it promoted witchcraft. Her husband tries to turn gay people straight. She is prone to verbal gaffes. The media will eat her alive, worse than Palin.

But if you don't mind those things, there is always the fact that she has no executive experience and no major legislative accomplishments.


"there is always the fact that she has no executive experience and no major legislative accomplishments."

That didn't seem to stop Obama!


Right. And how has that worked out?

Bill Fleming

George, if you read about them a little, you'll find that perhaps the reverse is just as true. If not for Hillary, there would be no Bill Clinton. They are a very interesting and talented couple. Extraordinary actually. Not unlike George and Laura Bush. If not for Laura, GWB might well still be a suffering addict instead of a relatively happy, recovering one.


3rd Party,

Who is it that you beleive should have the job?


Thanks, everyone for your comments!

DuggerSD: Good points! I especially agree with you regarding Bachmann. I, do, however, agree with Bill that Clinton is strong in her own right. I am not much of a fan of Secretary Clinton, and I do think there is something to what George says. But she has worked hard and become tremendously successful. Even while Clinton was president, many claimed that she was the one who wore the pants in the family. This might not have been difficult, as Former President Clinton seemed to have trouble remembering to keep his on, but it’s hard to argue that Clinton is not a strong figure.

Greg: Thanks again! If this transcript is accurate, it seems to lend more evidence to the idea that Representative Ellison believes that women who engage in terrorism are worthy of praise, while woman who take care of their families are disgusting.

Bill: I agree with you regarding Clinton. However, I do not entirely agree with your assessment of Palin and Bachmann. One of the reasons Palin is out while Bachmann is in is that Palin hasn’t announced a bid for the presidency. Another reason is that Bachmann seems to be able to keep her cool under pressure better. While Bachmann has made some mistakes, I have yet to see her have an “all of them” moment in the style of Sarah Palin. Much of Bachmann’s success is due to her strengths. One of them is perseverance, but it is not the only one.

3rd Party: I think Jimi’s post is apt here. It seems like verbal gaffes are part of the presidency these days. At least Bachmann hasn’t claimed to have visited 57 states or asked anyone in a wheelchair to stand up! Nor has she plagiarized stories about other people’s family members or falsely blamed deaths on insurance companies. (See: http://southdakotapolitics.blogs.com/south_dakota_politics/2009/09/a-tale-of-two-patients.html) On your other claims: Bachmann did not ban Aladdin. One teacher at a charter school she helped establish did. I can’t see any sign that Bachmann was involved in the ban. If you can, I’d certainly be glad to look at any evidence you have to present.


Doesn't really matter if it was her idea to ban it or not. Just like it doesn't matter that other politicians make gaffes. It's all about perception. And once she gets media attention the public's perception of her is going to plummet.

As far as who I am supporting, I'm not really sure. I want someone who has the resolve to stand up and reform entitlements/spending. Problem is that most people who have the resolve are not electable because the public doesn't want to hear it.


Both things matter. The media paid attention to Obama's gaffes and to Biden's. The Obama ticket still won the presidency. What this says to me is that a gaffe is not a sure sign of a loss. The other matters because your claim is easily proven false. When falsehoods are so easily debunked, much of the time, the accusers come out looking worse than the accused.


Miranda, Bill:
Without the President, Hillary achieves nothing except being some sort of lawyer in some city some place. Hillary Clinton hitched her star to a man and followed him all of the way. I am not so sure she was humiliated by the President as she knew what he was and allowed it before. I believe she only stayed married to him because she calculated he was going far and she wanted to go along for the ride. If she had any self-respect, she would have ditched him. However when she weighed the alternatives, she decided she could live with it as long as she got what she wanted.
This is not to say she did not take advantage of her position. She won a Senate seat, based primarily on being First Lady. She challenged BHO only to be turned upon by the media she counted on vaulting her to the top. But even her position of Secretary of State would not happen if not for first having been married to Bill Clinton.

Bill Fleming

Two surprises here. 1. That DuggerSD thinks so highly of Bill Clinton, and 2. That DuggerSD advocates for divorce. I would have taken him for a "family values" kinda guy.

That DuggerSD apparently thinks so little of women actually doesn't surprise me at all.


Bachmann helped start a school that banned Aladdin. And she left because people complained there was too much religion being injected into the curriculum. And her husband tries to turn gay people straight. When people hear that they will think she is strange. And then when they hear her gaffes it re-enforces that idea.

That's why it hurts her more than someone like Obama. And that along with the fact that she has no executive experience or major legislative accomplishments is why she has no chance.

Bill Fleming

Yes experience is key. Say what you will about Obama's experience before he was elected. He now has more experience being the POTUS than any who will run against him, during one of the most trying times in our nation's history.

It will take someone with exceptional credentials to defeat him. Oh, and a huge amount of money.



"That DuggerSD apparently thinks so little of women actually doesn't surprise me at all."


Advocating that a woman have enough respect for herself to leave a man who cheated and humiliated her is hardly "thinking little of women." Sticking with Slick made her look like an idiot, not a hero!

Bill Fleming

Jimi, what can I tell ya? 71% of your fellow Americans appear to disagree with you.
Maybe you missed the memo? http://www.pollingreport.com/C2.htm#Hillary



Yep....and 52% of our country voted for Barack Obama....so what is your point? And why did you offer a poll that has nothing to do with the blatant insult you spewed upon DuugerSD's fine name?

Bill Fleming

Because DuggerSD offered his own evidence as have you, Jimi.


DuggerSD: Almost everyone who is in a position of power has gotten there with some help. Meanwhile, there have been many first ladies. Most of them have not won their own political seats. Clinton has, and I do think it takes some strength to successfully run a political campaign, especially at the federal level. But I also think it takes strength to raise your kids well and to stand up for for social values - even when they are not popular.

I do agree with you that Clinton's political ambitions probably influenced her to stay in her marriage. But that does not mean that going through it wasn't hard or that it did not take some strength to put on a happy face. I don't have a lot of admiration for Clinton's values or policies, but I do think that it is reasonable to claim that she is a strong figure in American politics.

Bill: The comments that are truly offensive to women are those that were spoken by Representative Ellison.

3rd Party: No. Her reason for leaving (at least, according to her) was that the school was not performing well academically. I'm not convinced that the fact that people might find something about Bachmann "strange" is enough to sink her. There's a lot of strangeness to go around. Hank Johnson thinks Guam might "tip over and capsize" if too many people stand on it. Joe Biden has referred to President Obama "a black man who is "clean" and articulate. These guys are still in office. Not only that, but the country is split nearly in half on the issue of gay marriage. While Bachmann may lose votes from those who promote homosexuality, she may also win votes from those who do not. I think it's too soon to count anyone out of the running.


Miranda, I do not say Hillary has not done ANYTHING on her own. But let's look at the evidence. If Hillary drops Bill like a rock after the first few episodes while in Little Rock, Hillary probably goes on to become a lawyer someplace else and we never hear from her. Bachman and Palin both became successful with the
SUPPORT of their husbands and went on to win elections again with SUPPORT. My point is Hillary Clinton won an election BECAUSE of her husband.
Bill, I have learned a long time ago that when someone accuses me of being something I am not, it usually is a case of projection. I have said nothing about thinking little of women.

Bill Fleming

No doubt in your mind that's true, DuggerSD. But your characterization of both Palin and Clinton is so far off the mark it can only reflect your own ego and political prejudices. You appear not to know, nor care to know anything at all about either woman. You are simply comparing because they are of the same gender and preferring one at the expense of the other simply to stroke your own ego. In other words, you are exploiting them both to serve your own ends.

Talk about projecting!

duggar s d

billsomething we finally agree upon . there is no comparison between chelan and hillary. And who has the ego?

Bill Fleming

DuggerSD, what's a chelan?

Greg Lang

Here is something else I wrote up on Keith Ellison in 2006. I googled "ungagged + Soliah" http://presslord.com/06-19-06.htm

Some thoughts and questions about Keith Ellison

June 19, 2006

Powerlineblog.com has continued it's "Who is Keith Ellison" series. If interested I strongly recommend that you read these postings if you are interested in this. I will try not duplicate the points made there but instead concentrate of the Soliah/Olson association.

First off, the fundraiser "Ungagged 1"was primarily attended by middle class white people. From the reports I recieved and from and from TV news reports it seemed a mix of Highland park neighbors, people from Minnehaha Methodist Church and a few "leftover left" activists, somewhat like the type seem at the Wednesday afternoon Lake Street Bridge protests.

My guess that the reference to the Nation of Islam (NOI) did not even register with most of the relatively small number of attendees. The reference to NIO did not seem a wise way to "play to the crowd". The "leftover left and the NOI are in many ways polar opposites. "Ungagged 1" was pre 9-11 and there was NO marked animosity towards Muslims in the Twin Cites. As a matter of fact, the Twin Cities probably had the highest concentration of refugee Muslim immigrants from Ethiopia of any place in the US. The NOI is headquartered in Chicago but does not seem to have much of a permanent presence in the Twin Cites.

Ellison, in his speech mentioned seeing the movie "Patty Hearst". This movie had a scene where where some Black Muslims who wanted to meet Hearst but this was before the Los Angeles shootout. Soliah/Olson only started actively helping the SLA after the Los Angeles shootout. Also, the Back Muslin scene in the movie "Patty Hearst" ended with a young black Muslin girl telling the (pre-shootout) SLA "Go kill some pigs!". After the Los Angeles shootout, when Soliah/Olson began her active involvement there is no evidence of knowing involvement by Black Muslims in aid the surviving SLA members.

The lastest archive.org scan of Saraolsondefense.com was July 26, 2002. Keith Ellison is listed as an endorser . This was after 9-11 and the Soliah/Olson Los Angeles guilty plea "flip flop". It is also after Soliah/Olson was indicted in the murder of Myrna Opsahl, mother of four killed while helping deposit the church collections in the Crocker National Bank.

If Ellison had up at all on the SLA, even checking the old "Patty Hearst online" at claykeck.com or courttv.com he should have been aware that that the SLA assassinated Marcus Foster.

In a Minneapolis Star Tribune Story Ellison said he became interest in the Nation of Islam and becoming a Black Muslin after reading "The Autobiography of Malcom X". Malcom X became disenchanted with the NOI. The assination of Malcom X is widely believed to have been associated with the NOI.

For coincidence author Alex Hailey wrote the forward to Marcus Foster's book http:// MakingSchoolsWork.com

Nothing illegal in what Keith Ellison did but it might be telling about Ellison's temperament, character and moral bearing. The voter of the Minnesota fifth congressional district and the potential campaign donors have a right to know about Ellison's public statement and public actions.

Return to Soliah.com

Send me Mail

Last updated June 21, 2006 (NO)

The comments to this entry are closed.