Bachmann signs The Family Lead pledge

[Zona]

When Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann signed a pledge that claimed black Americans were better off as slaves than they are today, she apparently hadn't read it in detail.

Her campaign said Saturday that she actually didn't agree with that part of the pledge.


But Bachmann campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart said Saturday that the candidate didn't sign that part of the pledge. (ed...lol. How is that possible?)

"After careful deliberation and wise insight and input from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued," group spokeswoman Julie Summa wrote. "We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow."

Bachmann did not read pledge calling slavery a better arrangement for blacks | The Raw Story

So, first she didn't read that part, then when she signed at the end of the document, she didnt really mean to sign off on the slavery part. Then, after the backlash, they removed it complely from the document.

You ******* people will defend your side no matter how dumb they make you look.

 

[Si modo]

We've talked about how black kids had it better back in slave times (according to Bachmann).

Question........with the degradation of marriage (i.e. 51 percent divorce rate), doesn't that mean that white kids had it better back then as well?

No wonder Newt wouldn't sign it.

No, people like YOU have talked about how black kids had it better in slave times according to Bachmann.

People like ME have talked about how Bachmann never said that, that was never in the pledge, but some keep saying it anyway because they seem to be so desperate for it to be true.

The issue of white kids has not come up, but the white kids, Asian kids, Hispanic kids, black kids--ALL kids--are absolutely better off with a loving mother and father in the home than in any other circumstance. Which is the point that both Bachmann and Family Leader has been consistent in promoting. And you can try to dispute that til the cows come home, but good luck.

Or you can continue to mischaracterize and misrepresent the statement in the pledge and Bachmann's position on it. Your choice.

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Kids aren't necessarily better off with two parents, especially if one of them is an abuser.

Very true, ABS. But, in general and given that both parents are somewhat sane, the kids are better off with both of them around.

I don't think the 'pro-family' types would disagree with you, either.

 

[elvis]

thing is, white kids were also more likely to have both parents in the home in 1850 than today. So why bring race into it?

 

[Dot Com]

When Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann signed a pledge that claimed black Americans were better off as slaves than they are today, she apparently hadn't read it in detail.

Her campaign said Saturday that she actually didn't agree with that part of the pledge.


But Bachmann campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart said Saturday that the candidate didn't sign that part of the pledge.

"After careful deliberation and wise insight and input from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued," group spokeswoman Julie Summa wrote. "We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow."

Bachmann did not read pledge calling slavery a better arrangement for blacks | The Raw Story

So, first she didn't read that part, then when she signed at the end of the document, she didnt really mean to sign off on the slavery part. Then, after the backlash, they removed it complely from the document.

You ******* people will defend your side no matter how dumb they make you look.

Either way, it shows that she was just out there doing whatever it took to pander to the Repub/conservative base

 

[Zona]

We've talked about how black kids had it better back in slave times (according to Bachmann).

Question........with the degradation of marriage (i.e. 51 percent divorce rate), doesn't that mean that white kids had it better back then as well?

No wonder Newt wouldn't sign it.

No, people like YOU have talked about how black kids had it better in slave times according to Bachmann.

People like ME have talked about how Bachmann never said that, that was never in the pledge, but some keep saying it anyway because they seem to be so desperate for it to be true.

The issue of white kids has not come up, but the white kids, Asian kids, Hispanic kids, black kids--ALL kids--are absolutely better off with a loving mother and father in the home than in any other circumstance. Which is the point that both Bachmann and Family Leader has been consistent in promoting. And you can try to dispute that til the cows come home, but good luck.

Or you can continue to mischaracterize and misrepresent the statement in the pledge and Bachmann's position on it. Your choice.

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Kids aren't necessarily better off with two parents, especially if one of them is an abuser.

Or if there is a slave owner involved. A ******* slave owner!

Bachmann is out of her ******* mind. She really is.

 

[Stephanie]

When Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann signed a pledge that claimed black Americans were better off as slaves than they are today, she apparently hadn't read it in detail.

Her campaign said Saturday that she actually didn't agree with that part of the pledge.


But Bachmann campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart said Saturday that the candidate didn't sign that part of the pledge.

"After careful deliberation and wise insight and input from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued," group spokeswoman Julie Summa wrote. "We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow."

Bachmann did not read pledge calling slavery a better arrangement for blacks | The Raw Story

So, first she didn't read that part, then when she signed at the end of the document, she didnt really mean to sign off on the slavery part. Then, after the backlash, they removed it complely from the document.

You ******* people will defend your side no matter how dumb they make you look.

Either way, it shows that she was just out there doing whatever it took to pander to the Repub/conservative base

yeah right.

 

[Zona]

When Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann signed a pledge that claimed black Americans were better off as slaves than they are today, she apparently hadn't read it in detail.

Her campaign said Saturday that she actually didn't agree with that part of the pledge.


But Bachmann campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart said Saturday that the candidate didn't sign that part of the pledge.

"After careful deliberation and wise insight and input from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued," group spokeswoman Julie Summa wrote. "We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow."

Bachmann did not read pledge calling slavery a better arrangement for blacks | The Raw Story

So, first she didn't read that part, then when she signed at the end of the document, she didnt really mean to sign off on the slavery part. Then, after the backlash, they removed it complely from the document.

You ******* people will defend your side no matter how dumb they make you look.

Either way, it shows that she was just out there doing whatever it took to pander to the Repub/conservative base

yeah right.

Excellent retort. Thought provoking. Insightful. Wow. Way to look into what I wrote and give a brilliant synopsis.

 

[Stephanie]

Either way, it shows that she was just out there doing whatever it took to pander to the Repub/conservative base

yeah right.

Excellent retort. Thought provoking. Insightful. Wow. Way to look into what I wrote and give a brilliant synopsis.

you wrote nothing of worth. you posted some shit article from RAW STORY. another site like thinkprogess, mediamatters, etc.

 

[Si modo]

thing is, white kids were also more likely to have both parents in the home in 1850 than today. So why bring race into it?

True.

And a simple explanation works for me because I am an Occam's razor type of person: The white middle and upper class family values Republicans are already in the bank. With the rapidly growing black middle and upper class, family issues are big with them, too. The black family issues voters - they are not in the bank for the Republican party and the appeal is to them.

Votes from the undecided (or wavering) are the brass ring for the election.

 

[appleannie1]

Here is a link to the pledge. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/The-Family-Leader-Presidential-Pledge.pdf

One is longer wait periods for people seeking a divorce. In many states that wait is a year. Does that mean that a woman that is hiding from an abusive husband will now have to hide for a couple years simply because the party that wants "smaller government" wants to be able to dictate to people what their marriage means and how long their marriage should be? It is the equivalent to Sharia Law for so-called self difined Christians that want the entire country to follow their rules.

 

[Foxfyre]

No, people like YOU have talked about how black kids had it better in slave times according to Bachmann.

People like ME have talked about how Bachmann never said that, that was never in the pledge, but some keep saying it anyway because they seem to be so desperate for it to be true.

The issue of white kids has not come up, but the white kids, Asian kids, Hispanic kids, black kids--ALL kids--are absolutely better off with a loving mother and father in the home than in any other circumstance. Which is the point that both Bachmann and Family Leader has been consistent in promoting. And you can try to dispute that til the cows come home, but good luck.

Or you can continue to mischaracterize and misrepresent the statement in the pledge and Bachmann's position on it. Your choice.

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Kids aren't necessarily better off with two parents, especially if one of them is an abuser.

Very true, ABS. But, in general and given that both parents are somewhat sane, the kids are better off with both of them around.

I don't think the 'pro-family' types would disagree with you, either.

Now you're the one being patient.

I get so sick of the leftist talking points intended to divert from any discussion of a real issue.

If I say I favor policies that encourage small business to grow, expand, and hire people, they say: you favor corporate welfare.

If I say I am pro life, they say you want to invade a woman's womb or enslave women.

If I say I prefer smaller, efficient, effective government with the federal government doing what it was constitutionally charged to do, they say I want to impoverish old people, snatch food from the mouths of school children, and throw welfare recipients out into the street.

If I say parents are better off in a home with a loving mother and father present, they say: kids aren't better off under slavery or with an abusive parent.

It really really REALLY gets old because it is sooooo ignorant and stupid that it makes me want to give up message boarding sometimes. Almost.

 

[Luissa]

BREAKING: Bachmann pledges to ban pornography | ThinkProgress

BREAKING: BACHMANN PLEDGES TO BAN PORNOGRAPHY | Tonight, Michele Bachmann became the first presidential candidate to sign a pledge created by THE FAMiLY LEADER, an influential social-conservative group in Iowa. By signing the pledge Bachmann “vows” to “uphold the institution of marriage as only between one man and one woman” by committing herself to 14 specifics steps. The ninth step calls for the banning of “all forms” of pornography. The pledge also states that homosexuality is both a choice and a health risk. You can read all the details of the pledge here.

And it says that homosexuality is both a choice and a health risk.

"Small government Conservatism" at it's finest.

Edit:

I didn't see the footnotes, I'll admit. If she was just referring to child pornography then I was incorrect in my OP.

That being said, the vow was written pretty poorly then. I read it originally as women and the future generation of this country later on, not today. Because why mention women and banning all forms of pornography in the same sentence if you mean to ban only child pornography?

But again, if the pledge refers to just child pornography, then I was incorrect in posting my OP and was wrong.

Edit #2:

OPINION: Relax. Bachmann Didn't Pledge To Ban Pornography  - News - Talk Radio News Service: News, Politics, Media

When reached for comment, Bob Vander Plaats, the organization’s president, appeared surprised that the language has been interpreted as a call to outlaw adult entertainment.

“We are not calling for a nationwide band on pornography,” Vander Plaats said during a phone interview. “The bullet point doesn’t even come close to calling for that.”

Vander Plaats explained that the language was meant to imply opposition to women being forced into pornography or prostitution, a far cry from the Think Progress headline: BREAKING: Bachmann pledges to ban pornography

I am waiting for them to go after masturbation.

 

[appleannie1]

BREAKING: Bachmann pledges to ban pornography | ThinkProgress

BREAKING: BACHMANN PLEDGES TO BAN PORNOGRAPHY | Tonight, Michele Bachmann became the first presidential candidate to sign a pledge created by THE FAMiLY LEADER, an influential social-conservative group in Iowa. By signing the pledge Bachmann “vows” to “uphold the institution of marriage as only between one man and one woman” by committing herself to 14 specifics steps. The ninth step calls for the banning of “all forms” of pornography. The pledge also states that homosexuality is both a choice and a health risk. You can read all the details of the pledge here.

And it says that homosexuality is both a choice and a health risk.

"Small government Conservatism" at it's finest.

Edit:



Edit #2:

OPINION: Relax. Bachmann Didn't Pledge To Ban Pornography* - News - Talk Radio News Service: News, Politics, Media

When reached for comment, Bob Vander Plaats, the organization’s president, appeared surprised that the language has been interpreted as a call to outlaw adult entertainment.

“We are not calling for a nationwide band on pornography,” Vander Plaats said during a phone interview. “The bullet point doesn’t even come close to calling for that.”

Vander Plaats explained that the language was meant to imply opposition to women being forced into pornography or prostitution, a far cry from the Think Progress headline: BREAKING: Bachmann pledges to ban pornography

I am waiting for them to go after masturbation.

Santorum, who already signed the same pledge, tried that before the voters of Pennsylvania told him what they thought of him by voting him out. He wanted a law passed banning masturbation. Just think of the jobs that would provide. All those bedroom and bathroom police looking in your windows.

 

[Stephanie]

BREAKING: Bachmann pledges to ban pornography | ThinkProgress



And it says that homosexuality is both a choice and a health risk.

"Small government Conservatism" at it's finest.

Edit:



Edit #2:

OPINION: Relax. Bachmann Didn't Pledge To Ban Pornography* - News - Talk Radio News Service: News, Politics, Media

I am waiting for them to go after masturbation.

Santorum, who already signed the same pledge, tried that before the voters of Pennsylvania told him what they thought of him by voting him out. He wanted a law passed banning masturbation. Just think of the jobs that would provide. All those bedroom and bathroom police looking in your windows.

wtf

 

[Jarhead]

BREAKING: Bachmann pledges to ban pornography | ThinkProgress



And it says that homosexuality is both a choice and a health risk.

"Small government Conservatism" at it's finest.

Edit:



Edit #2:

OPINION: Relax. Bachmann Didn't Pledge To Ban Pornography* - News - Talk Radio News Service: News, Politics, Media

I am waiting for them to go after masturbation.

Santorum, who already signed the same pledge, tried that before the voters of Pennsylvania told him what they thought of him by voting him out. He wanted a law passed banning masturbation. Just think of the jobs that would provide. All those bedroom and bathroom police looking in your windows.

just the bedroom and the bathroom?
Boy...you havent lived like I have lived!

 

[appleannie1]

I am waiting for them to go after masturbation.

Santorum, who already signed the same pledge, tried that before the voters of Pennsylvania told him what they thought of him by voting him out. He wanted a law passed banning masturbation. Just think of the jobs that would provide. All those bedroom and bathroom police looking in your windows.

just the bedroom and the bathroom?
Boy...you havent lived like I have lived!

Well that would mean a sex cop for every room and car.

Santorum, Gingrich, and Bachmann are all against oral sex, anal sex, masturbation, divorce, fertility clinics etc. etc. Just do some googling and you will see I am telling the truth.

 

[Stephanie]

Santorum, Gingrich, and Bachmann are all against oral sex, anal sex, masturbation, divorce, fertility clinics etc

holy smokes, WHO CARES.

 

[ABikerSailor]

HEY!!!!!! There is nothing wrong with getting a blowjob, masturbating, or divorce.

Those 3 things have given me much joy in my life, especially when I divorced my old lady.

 

[Luissa]

I wonder if he knows masturbation promotes prostate health, and good sperm?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Personally I think it is sad here that some of our friends are so dishonestly characterizing Michelle Bachmann or any who are acknowledging that the conditions of life for so many black children today is deplorable. For some reason they don't wish to discuss that which was after all the point the pledge was making. No, they would rather accuse others of intentions that were not intended, of words that were never said, of motives that don't exist, and they throw in a lot of non sequitur, red herrings, and straw men to boot.

That is sad people. That is sad.

If there was actually any sincerity from Conservatives in actually trying to help those deplorable conditions, I might have some sympathy. The cruel nature of the document in its attacks on blacks, gays and Muslims was an embarassment for the GOP. The farther they distance themselves from that partisan rag...the better they are

Do you want to know a problem with using rhetoric in the place of facts? There is always somebody on the other side who is just as good, or even better, at doing it.

As an example I offer this off the top of my head.

If there was any sincerity from progressives in actually helping alleviate these deplorable conditions, I might believe they care. The cruel nature of welfare, affirmative action, and the wholesale slaughter of black babies by Planned Parenthood is an embarrassment for Democrats. The further they distance themselves from that genocide the better they are.

See what I mean?