Vieira to Michele Bachmann: Why Won't You 'Mean Spirited' Republicans Extend Unemployment Benefits?
Michele Bachmann had a formidable task, on Friday's Today show, as she tried her best to explain to NBC's Meredith Vieira that Republicans wanted to keep taxes low on the job producers to create more jobs, but Vieira wasn't having any of it, as she accused her and the GOP of being "mean spirited" to the jobless for not being more generous on unemployment benefits.
Vieira argued that the unemployed think Republicans who are for "these tax cuts, even for multimillionaires but opposed to extending unemployment benefits that are helping the people who are hurting most" were being "mean spirited." Bachmann responded by correcting the cartoon image many have of those who earn over $250,000 a year as those who were "lighting their cigars with $100 bills" as she explained many of them were small business owners who create jobs and added that what the jobless really want most is a regular paycheck from one of those job creators, as seen in this exchange:
(video after the jump)
MEREDITH VIEIRA: Well wait a minute! They feel the Republicans, they're all for these tax cuts, even for multimillionaires but opposed to extending the unemployment benefits that are helping the people who are hurting the most. To them, this is mean spirited. Why are they wrong?
MICHELE BACHMANN: But we're not talking about millionaires sitting in leather chairs lighting their cigars with $100 bills. We're talking about a carpet layer in Sheboygan, Wisconsin who employs his brother-in-law and his son. And they have $250,000 in gross sales. That's what we're talking about. Real people who aren't living large.
VIEIRA: Well you're talking about everybody. That and also people who are living large.
BACHMANN: But we're talking about everyone and what, and remember those people who are the job providers, those are the people that won't be able to provide more jobs. That's what people want right now. They want jobs, they want paychecks. That's the focus.
VIEIRA: But they also want their unemployment benefits Congresswoman. They also want that and you're opposed to that.
BACHMANN: People want a paycheck, they want paychecks more than they want unemployment benefits.
The following is the full segment as it was aired on the December 10 Today show:
MEREDITH VIEIRA: Minnesota's Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is with us now. Representative Bachmann, good morning to you.
[On screen headline: "Deal Or No Deal? Will Tea Party Back President's Tax Cut Compromise?"]
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, (R) MINNESOTA: Good morning, Meredith.
VIEIRA: The clock is ticking on this lame duck Congress. You have what, one more week and then you adjourn for good. As Kelly just pointed out House Democrats say they're not gonna accept this, this compromise package as proposed. They will accept extending tax cuts, but not at this level. Is there any wiggle room here?
BACHMANN: Well you know maybe that's what we should do. Maybe we should make this very simple, at this point, and just extend the current tax rates as they are and let that be it and not deal with anything else. We may, we may need to just keep it simple. I'm a former federal tax litigation attorney-
VIEIRA: But they're saying no to that. No, no they're saying no to that. They don't want to extend the tax cuts as is, they're saying they want to set a level, level on them.
BACHMANN: And that's, that's kind of the problem right now because the real, that's the issue. Will taxes go up massively on January 1st or will they stay what they are? For, for those of us coming from the conservative perspective we don't want to see anyone's taxes go up. And the compromise that was forged wasn't rich enough for Speaker Pelosi and for the Democrats. They want the taxes up even higher and that's really where the line of demarcation is in this discussion.
VIEIRA: Well let me ask you about fiscal responsibility because that's something that's very important to you. If you extend these tax cuts we're hearing that we're gonna add, what is it, $500 billion to the deficit. So how do you justify that? You said you opposed extending unemployment benefits because that's gonna add $55 billion, but that's a lot less.
BACHMANN: Well remember it, it all begins with spending. And there's been dramatic overspending that has gone on. And so we've got over $1.4 trillion in overspending in '09, $1.3 trillion in overspending this year. We have to cut back.
VIEIRA: But how, how do you justify adding more money to the deficit? That much more?
BACHMANN: Well remember that money is, is, when people are allowed to keep their own money, that's considered a deficit. I don't, I don't agree with that definition. When people keep their own money, that's considered a deficit to government, but it's not a deficit to your pocket or mine. And so I think it's important that people can keep their money.
VIEIRA: Let me ask you about people who might be sitting there, watching this interview and they're frustrated because they feel while the Republican-
BACHMANN: I don't blame them.
VIEIRA: Well wait a minute! They feel the Republicans, they're all for these tax cuts, even for multimillionaires but opposed to extending the unemployment benefits that are helping the people who are hurting the most. To them, this is mean spirited. Why are they wrong?
BACHMANN: But we're not talking about millionaires sitting in leather chairs lighting their cigars with $100 bills. We're talking about a carpet layer in Sheboygan, Wisconsin who employs his brother-in-law and his son. And they have $250,000 in gross sales. That's what we're talking about. Real people who aren't living large.
VIEIRA: Well you're talking about everybody. That and also people who are living large.
BACHMANN: But we're talking about everyone and what, and remember those people who are the job providers, those are the people that won't be able to provide more jobs. That's what people want right now. They want jobs, they want paychecks. That's the focus.
VIEIRA: But they also want their unemployment benefits Congresswoman. They also want that and you're opposed to that.
BACHMANN: People want a paycheck, they want paychecks more than they want unemployment benefits. Right now unemployment is-
VIEIRA: If they don't have a job they want unemployment benefits.
BACHMANN: That's, that's right and that's what we want. We want people to have jobs. Right now it's historic. People have unemployment benefits for two years. It isn't just unemployment. It's also food stamps, it's also housing assistance. It's also all the other programs that go along with it. So the best thing we can do is grow the economy and to do that we need to keep rates low enough so that employers can hire more people.
VIEIRA: Let me ask you, before I go, the, the President has basically lost a lot of support within his own party but he's, has he gained some traction among Republicans by taking the position he's taken?
BACHMANN: Some but there are a lot of problems with, that the Republicans have with this bill too. Because there are tax increasers in this and it spends a lot of money that's not paid for. So there's not unanimity on the Republican side either and the clock is ticking, like you opened the interview with. We're getting very close. I'm a business owner. We've got to have tax tables. This is highly irresponsible. We have to get the work done, so people have certainty.
VIEIRA: Alright Representative Bachmann. Thank you so much for joining us this morning.
BACHMANN: Thank you, Meredith.
—Geoffrey Dickens is the Senior News Analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here
- Geoffrey Dickens's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
We Can't AFFORD This - DUH!
Submitted by DaMama on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:22pm.
I will never understand the logic of liberals. Even that seems like an oxymoron.
Viera and her ilk don't seem to understand that you can't keep funding this stuff if there is NO MONEY. Our country is going deeper and deeper into debt by funding these programs that we cannot afford. It is imparitive to be fiscally responsible in this economic climate.
Our church feeds 150+ families each week. There are other churches in our area that do the same. There are many non-profit organizations that can help those in need. It is not the governments responsibility to take care of us. It our our responsibility as citizens to care for each other.
I would really like to see Viera's checkbook and see if she operates at a deficit every month.
Amen, the feds are not
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 4:44pm.
Amen, the feds are not supposed to be in the charity business.
Well, DUH!
Submitted by Red Jeep on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:29pm.
FTA: Vieira argued that the unemployed think Republicans who are for "these tax cuts, even for multimillionaires but opposed to extending unemployment benefits that are helping the people who are hurting most" were being "mean spirited."
Well who is telling them that, Meredith? You are. You jackwagon!
Since when is keeping the tax rates the same, a tax cut for the wealthy?
Since when is 2 years of unemployment benefits not enough? What do you want, 5 years?
Christmas, Scrooge, Republicans, mean spirited, 'tis the season.
Never saw such blatant lying before in the MSM. 1984 is here, a few years late, Newspeak rules.
Merideth, maybe you will
Submitted by inquiringmind on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:33pm.
Merideth, maybe you will understand it this way. You now earn 5 million a year. If you ask for 6 million for next year and your employer says no, has it cost anyone, you or your employer, an additional million? No
So if we say no to paying the government more next year in tax collections as a percent of earned income, has it cost them anything? No
"They Want"
Submitted by almostacowboy on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:39pm.
VIEIRA: But they also want their unemployment benefits Congresswoman. They also want that and you're opposed to that.They want and want and want and want and want...... well, I want to win the CA Lottery and I want Charlize Theron to have a brain and I want to understand women. Well, at least I have a chance at the Lotto.
And here I thinking they
Submitted by Cowboy on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:58pm.
And here I was thinking they wanted JOBS, rather than unemployment...
Oh, yeah....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 1:09pm.
Joe Biden's 3-letter word, "J-O-B-S!" Thanks for the memories.
Is it a prerequisite for
Submitted by Smartypants on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:42pm.
Is it a prerequisite for liberals to be amazingly obtuse?
Seriously...
Submitted by jimbo297 on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:51pm.
...why did she even bother to give the interview-it's not like Meredith was interested in her answers, except to use them back against her. "Journalists" these days are like trial lawyers-never ask a question you don't already know the answer to. Chrissy Matthews of course being the example against which all others are measured.
No...
Submitted by C-townGiant on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 1:47pm.
But it sure helps.
Viera = another multimillionaire whining about multimillionaires
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:50pm.
Imagine making $10 MILLION A YEAR. I wonder if she gets paid weekly or bi-weekly?
STHU already.
Think she sends the
Submitted by Cowboy on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:55pm.
Think she sends the government extra money when she files her taxes?
Why is Meredith Vieira only
Submitted by Cowboy on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:54pm.
Why is Meredith Vieira only worried bout benefits, and not jobs for people... especially since we have already paid TRILLIONS of dollars for them?
Why does she want the government to take more money from the people who create most of the jobs?
One could almost think she is more for handouts and redistribution than she is for jobs...
Because unemployment is the new growth industry!
Submitted by Red Jeep on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 1:04pm.
Per Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "Economists tell us that unemployment insurance returns $2 to the economy for every $1 spent."
See? We might want 15 to 20% unemployment, and we can start really doubling money!Unemployment is "green"
Submitted by JakeMo on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 2:49pm.
Unemployment also helps fight global warming by keeping cars off the road.
I wonder if we can count the unemployed as "green jobs"
Yeahhhhh.... As I remember,
Submitted by Cowboy on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 4:39pm.
Yeahhhhh.... As I remember, the 'stimulus' was also based on Democrat multipliers... Those were based on assumed 'shovel ready jobs'...
I suppose, in a way, so is their unemployment multiplier...
Perhaps Viera is projecting
Submitted by gopcongress on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 1:34pm.
I wonder if Viera is wondering how she's going to get her income when her network has to fire everyone due to low ratings?
"The news and truth are not the same thing." -Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
Viera's job isn't dependent on market forces
Submitted by JakeMo on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 2:52pm.
Viera is at NBC. Before they have to fire anybody for low ratings, they'll just go back to the gov't and get more "stimulus" to keep them in business.
Vieira's Argument...
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 1:49pm.
(or at least the one she is pretending to present on other's behalf) seem to be that although extending the current tax rates will benefit those who provide jobs, it will also benefit those rich folk who are simply "living large" and that's just wrong so the rates shouldn't be extended.
OK, using the same argument, I can argue that though extending unemployment benefits will help those who are genuinely looking for work it will also help those who are not and are simply living off the government and that's wrong so unemployment benefits shouldn't be extended.
Where's the difference?
The difference is that one argument is from a left leaning perspective and the other is from a right leaning one.
Guess which one supposedly objective journalists like Vieira will never present?
It's a bogus comparison anyway
Submitted by ckc1227 on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 2:28pm.
Letting people keep money they earned is not the same as giving people money they didn't earn. I really wish folks would stop equating the two.
Meriditz......
Submitted by connman on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 3:12pm.
....You really need to start paying close attention when grown-ups speak hon .Americans want JOBS not BS Obama Hand outs....Ok?
Did November 2 happen?
Submitted by okiehawk44 on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 3:19pm.
STOP SPENDING!
How much more simple do we the people have to make this before you folks get it?
When oh when
Submitted by octavioj on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 5:42pm.
When will we ever start paying for stuff we actually spend, like unemployment benefits instead of the false paying for tax cuts the government never received? We can say that the tax rates, whatever they are, are depriving the government of the revenue of 100% of all taxable income in the US. That should be asked of Miss Vieira.
lazy, timid, sensational media
Submitted by cdmco on Thu, 12/16/2010 - 3:46pm.
In my opinion, the media's main problem isn't bias, it is being lazy, shallow, sensational, and timid. For example, Bachmann was repeating common misinformation about the potential tax changes. The income tax changes they were discussing would not affect a business with gross sales of $250,000. The tax changes would apply only to the net profits (after equipment and supplies are purchased, after any payroll is paid, after any expenses are deducted) taken home by the owner as personal income. That is a black and white fact that gets misunderstood (or misrepresented) over and over with little challenge. Does Bachman not understand or was her mistake deliberate? As long as either "side" gets to spread misinformation unchallenged, we are in trouble.
By the way, as for less black and white: it is easy to beleive a small three-person family carpet laying business (or Joe the Plumbers aspiring business) has gross revenues of $250,000, but for the owner to take home $250,000 in taxable income is a bit harder to believe.