Michele Bachmann (R-MN): I, too, know more about MIT scientist’s study on costs of emissions caps than he does.

Late Update: TPM Reader AV responds and tries to explain:

As a Minnesotan who lives in the 5th District but has worked in the 6th, I will say that perhaps the best question is “What is wrong with the 6th District in Minnesota that they would re-elect this beastly hellspawn who appears to represent that state?”

Minnesota does churn out some nutty characters, this is true: Jesse Ventura, Michele Bachmann, Prince and Norm Coleman come to mind (for various but not always common reasons). But you must also keep in mind that we unleashed unto the world the likes of Paul Wellstone, Eugene McCarthy and the Coen Brothers. We’re not terribly lame.

Oh, and we’re real nice, too.

We want your help in finding examples of the emerging meme that Obama’s proposed defense budget amounts to an old-style, lefty, dovish, weak-on-defense capitulation. Keep an eye especially on local media in your area. Oftentimes, comments made back home by senators and representatives fly under the national media radar.

Bonus points for finding examples of (1) Democrats (like Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma) saying it; (2) the media repeating and perpetuating it uncritically; and (3) Republicans who blame the phantom defense “cuts” on Obama’s out-of-control, budget-busting domestic spending, to use their terminology.

Email your examples, with links so we can confirm them, to the “Send Comments & News Tips” address at the top of the page. And, as always, thanks.

TPM Reader EK:

There’s a lot of discussion about how the Republicans are framing the ‘defense cut’ meme, but I’m also concerned about your response. It seems like your reaction is, “don’t say Obama is cutting Defense when he isn’t and shouldn’t.” My reaction is, “don’t give Obama credit for cutting the Defense budget when he isn’t and should.”

Late Update: TPM Reader JC responds:

EK’s comment — that Obama’s not cutting the Pentagon budget, and he should — is helpful, but it goes beyond that. There’s a curious silence in the left/center blogosphere about the merits of the policy that’s driving this latest budget.

The shift from top dollar, fancy-pants weapons systems to a COIN-centric Defense budget contains a host of issues worth considering. We’re betting heavily on a defense policy that that requires a) lots of troops on the ground, b) boatloads of money, & c) a willingness to insert ourselves in failed states & global hotspots where there are insurgencies to counter in the first place. In addition, it takes years (if not decades) for counterinsurgency to succeed — with, of course, absolutely no guarantee that it will. They don’t call this the Long War for nothing. Have Afghanistan & Iraq been so much fun that we were prepared to commit to this?

Clearly, none of this is an argument for continuing to spend on massively over budget Cold War-era programs. My point is that it would be useful to consider the implications of the policy behind the budget. Regrettably, not enough folks seem to be doing this. …

A few minutes ago, Contessa Brewer had on former Secretary of Defense William Cohen, one of that vanishing breed of moderate New England Republicans, and asked him “about this cut in defense spending.” To his credit, Cohen corrected her: “By the way, it’s not a cut. It’s a four percent increase.”

Note the chyron, too:

Kevin Phillips is blogging this week at TPMCafe’s Table for One. In this post, he addresses a topic we’ve touched on many times in recent weeks: the financialization of the U.S. economy:

This is a much grander-scale disaster than anything that happened in 1929-33. Worse, it dwarfs the abuses of debt, finance and financialization that brought down previous leading world economic powers like Britain and Holland (back when New York was New Amsterdam). I will return to these little-mentioned precedents in another post this week.

But for the moment, let me underscore: the average American knows little of the dimensions of the financial sector aggrandizement and misbehavior involved. Until this is remedied, there probably will not be enough informed, focused indignation to achieve far-reaching reform in the teeth of financial sector money and influence. Equivocation will triumph. This will not displease politicians and regulators leery of offending their contributors and backers.

Worth your time to read.

All that crazy stuff Michele Bachmann has been saying? Don’t worry. She says: “I haven’t purposely been trying to be inflammatory.”

The White House has released photos of the President’s quick stopover yesterday in Iraq.

TPM Reader JH:

One interesting trend in your tracking of the unfolding budget narrative is that of Oklahoma. Yes, Oklahoma. Rep. Boren has joined Rep. Cole and Sen. Inhofe making the delegation bipartisan in its categorical and overheated denunciations of the proposed DOD budget.

This may be dismissed as simply delegates from a conservative state showing their support for the DOD, but I think there is something more to it than that: it’s local politics at its best. All three politicians are engaging in a game of who can be the biggest champion for Oklahoma’s military bases. …

Oklahoma is home to the Army’s Ft. Sill as well as Tinker, Vance, and Altus Air Force Bases. Bases are not only sources of pro-military voters, and jobs created by businesses supporting military families. As importantly, many DoD contractors proliferate in the shadows of many bases–witness the Tinker Industrial Park, “Oklahoma’s Intellectual Property” and home to 35 of the largest defense contractors.

The DOD budget will slash the Army’s Future Combat Systems and overall Air Force numbers — moves that could affect each of these bases and Oklahoma’s defense contractors.

No budget is perfect, but it will be important to distinguish principled critics from those protecting more parochial interests. In the coming days, we will see more defenders of the status quo coming forward to attack this budget. It won’t just be Oklahoma’s politicians who are protecting their jobs and bases.

That said, it will be possible to separate those raising policy concerns from those protecting narrow interests. By their hyperbole and their district’s defense contractors will ye know the critics of real reform. Count these three Oklahomans among the defenders of a seemingly intractable Cold War mindset to DoD funding. …

Does your banker smuggle your loose diamonds into the country for you in his toothpaste tube? I didn’t think so.