I do think she could have been clearer and more precise in what she was saying, so I agree that she needs to be careful in what she says (though again, I didn't watch the whole speech).  Based on her words about skin color/language/economic status, one can interpret the part about “once you got here” as being over the course of hundreds of years of immigration, and that it was the vision that was crafted by the Framers (rather than the practice) which made no distinction between rich or poor, white or black, etc.  I think that is what she was referring to (the argument I have heard in the past is that freeing the slaves was only made possible because of the what the Framers inserted into the Constitution, even though slavery continued on for decades after its creation).  I'm not sure about the VA cuts, but I can almost guarantee you that significant union cuts are on the table in her plan as well.  I think that we should always expect a possibility of "spin" when there are anti-Bachmann news stories (same as anti-Palin stories).  I imagine that Bachmann and the Heritage Foundation would not want to tear into veterans just for the heck of it....there probably is another side of the story that we're not getting here.

I am going to try and keep myself from getting worked up when I hear politicians of any strike talk about cutting Veteran's Benefits.  I will admit I am biased being a veteran myself bu I cant help but wonder how anybody thinks veterans are getting over given the hundreds of billions of dollars spent every year on people that have never put there life on the line for their fellow countrymen.  I am talking about welfare, food stamps, and medicaid here.  2.5 billion is chump change compared to what is spent in unearned entitlements every year.  I would love to hear what the justification is for offsetting benefits.  Republicans finally got rid of concurrent receipt a few years ago, which means that I will not lose retirement pay dollar for dollar if I am determined to have a service connected disability when I retire later this year.  The Heritage Foundation report has no background, only numbers.  Here is a CBO report from 2006 about veterans disability benefits. I cannot find any other in-depth discussion of what the purpose of these cuts is.As to Bachmann or indeed, any politicians use or misuse of history.  She is not remarkable for her ignorance only remarkable to the extent tha any incorrect historical references she or any other conservative uses will be much more blown out of proportion than those of liberals.I cant see the video because it is only available in the US and I have a foreign IP address.

You should probably prepare yourself to be disappointed.

Here is a good [urlhttp://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=58E5B0F1-9D32-4D5A-A101-AC6F5787A68C]analysis piece from Politico [/url] about what the Tea Party is and is not and why it scares the hell out of republicans and democrats.  I thought this was the best paragraph in the piece and a very apt description:

In the tea party world, structure is bad, political parties are corrupt, politicians are liars and authority is suspect. In other words, members are just like my kids and American voters ? but a little more so.

My Italics

The article says the TP is a movement, where I think it is a revolution.  What's the difference between the two, if there are any?

I would say that a movement expresses a political opinion or desire while a revolution seeks to overthrow the current government/regime.  Movement sounds accurate to me.  The Tea Party does not seek to overthrow the government, only to reform it and it get the country back to first principles.

I think substantive reform is what we are looking for, the hardest part will be keeping people motivated to press for and demand that reform.