Democrats Attack Bachmann Saying She Would Be Submissive To Her Husband As President

[Stephanie]

So, Michelle Bachman didn't suggest that she was submissive in all things to her husband?

I'm confused.

Didn't she come out and say that she based her entire career on what her husband told her to do?

For instance, is this statement not accurate (from the Washington Post):

She’d never taken a tax course in law school, Bachmann told the Living Word Christian Center, but her husband decided she should pursue an advanced degree in the subject.

“Tax law! I hate taxes! Why should I go and do something like that?” Bachmann recalled thinking. “But the Lord said, ‘Be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.’ ”

Or maybe this video has been doctored somehow?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0rUBomKvY0]‪Bachmann: "God called me to run for Congress".‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

ho ho hum.

 

[Stephanie]

nobody does dumb better than you.

true story.

And nobody does stupid better than you, so you got me beat.

snappy patter

You're not playing with some little girl who is a push over dear. You should know that by now.

 

[Kuros]

I guess this is what you have to stoop to when your chosen candidate has no accomplishments to stand on. Just post articles from those who attack your candidate and whip yourself into righteous indignation.

In the meantime, I'll still be waiting for a thread that touts one of Michele Bachmann's accomplishments.

 

[Vast LWC]

I don't care what the pundits have to say about it, personally, but I am going to believe video of the woman speaking.

You don't get to pull a "John Kyl" when you're running for President.

 

[del]

And nobody does stupid better than you, so you got me beat.

snappy patter

You're not playing with some little girl who is a push over dear.

uh, yeah

 

[Stephanie]

I don't care what the pundits have to say about it, personally, but I am going to believe video of the woman speaking.

You don't get to pull a "John Kyl" when you're running for President.

who cares, believe what you want. It's just plain stupid.

 

[Vast LWC]

ho ho hum.

You can "ho hum" all you want, but if Michelle Bachman were to win the nomination, this little gem would effectively make her husband the candidate, and he's a worse choice than she is.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Democrats Attack Bachmann Saying She Would Be Submissive To Her Husband As President

This is silly.

Her attacks on the First and 14th Amendments alone more than disqualify her from holding any national office, including her present position.

 

[Vast LWC]

who cares, believe what you want. It's just plain stupid.

This isn't a question of what I "believe". Facts are facts. Video is video.

Yeah, those annoying "facts" are such a bother sometimes, aren't they?

 

[Stephanie]

ho ho hum.

You can "ho hum" all you want, but if Michelle Bachman were to win the nomination, this little gem would effectively make her husband the candidate, and he's a worse choice than she is.

huh?
you all sure weren't too conerned about any of that with your candidates. Or I guess they were all little angel saints.

 

[Rinata]

Democrats ought to look at the president when it comes to being submissive. Case in point:

Bowing to the Communist Chinese leader:

That has nothing to do with being submissive. It was just Obama showing respect. Something that most right wingers know nothing about. Also, what does it have to do with the topic of this thread??

And for your information, I also think MB would obey her husband. Isn't that what good Christian women do???

 

[Rinata]

I wonder what they called Hillary when she stood by her hound dog husband after he admitted to an affair ON NATIONAL T.V.

Now you see, two can play that dumb game.

This isn't about Hillary!! That was talked to death years ago. It's about Michelle Bachman. That's always your answer, Steph. Don't address the issue, go back in history to change the subject. That is not what an informed person does. Only dumb people. So I have always seen that you play the dumb game better than anyone on here. It's nothing new for you.

 

[Rinata]

So, Michelle Bachman didn't suggest that she was submissive in all things to her husband?

I'm confused.

Didn't she come out and say that she based her entire career on what her husband told her to do?

For instance, is this statement not accurate (from the Washington Post):

She’d never taken a tax course in law school, Bachmann told the Living Word Christian Center, but her husband decided she should pursue an advanced degree in the subject.

“Tax law! I hate taxes! Why should I go and do something like that?” Bachmann recalled thinking. “But the Lord said, ‘Be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.’ ”

Or maybe this video has been doctored somehow?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0rUBomKvY0]‪Bachmann: "God called me to run for Congress".‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

Thank you!! In her campaign speeches she makes comments all the time that has let us know who is boss in that house.

 

[Rinata]

And nobody does stupid better than you, so you got me beat.

snappy patter

You're not playing with some little girl who is a push over dear. You should know that by now.

You just never know when to quit, do you??? You're making a fool of yourself, yet again.

 

[Mustang]

The question is whether or not conservatives could handle having Marcus Bachmann as their First Lady.

 

[Stephanie]

snappy patter

You're not playing with some little girl who is a push over dear. You should know that by now.

You just never know when to quit, do you??? You're making a fool of yourself, yet again.

meow. who is the fool..?
do I chase you around the board, Nope, I don't bother with you at all, because you're not worth it.
put your claws back in or go sharpen them...

 

[Bigfoot]

NOW should be along at any time to defend her.

 

[Vast LWC]

huh?
you all sure weren't too conerned about any of that with your candidates. Or I guess they were all little angel saints.

Name one other candidate that stated that they obeyed another person in all of their major decisions?

 

[Vast LWC]

NOW should be along at any time to defend her.

To defend her right to be submissive?

NOW would step in to defend her against misogynistic attacks.

Quoting what Ms Bachman said about her particular submissive personality is not in fact misogynist in any way.

In fact, pointing out that Ms Bachman is in thrall to a man due to ancient superstitions and mores is pretty much the opposite of misogyny.

 

[Stephanie]

NOW should be along at any time to defend her.

To defend her right to be submissive?

NOW would step in to defend her against misogynistic attacks.

Quoting what Ms Bachman said about her particular submissive personality is not in fact misogynist in any way.

In fact, pointing out that Ms Bachman is in thrall to a man due to ancient superstitions and mores is pretty much the opposite of misogyny.

holy smoke, this really really does have your panties all in a twist, eh?