Secular Talk: Michele Bachmann Says Something Not Stupid?

[WhoIsNumberNone]

Clip from the Wednesday, February 26th 2014 edition of The Kyle Kulinski Show, which airs live on Blog Talk Radio and Secular Talk Radio monday - friday 4-6pm Eastern.

[shebornik]

1. Could this mean that something good is possible from anyone?

Or is it the old saying if you take an infinite number of monkeys and an infinite number of typewriters eventually they will write all of the great books?

[Xipe Totec]

2. A broken clock tells the correct time twice a day. nt

[WhoIsNumberNone]

3. I was about to make that same comment myself

Although in fairness to clocks, Michele's more like a broken calender...

[Lucky Luciano]

4. Wow she actually did make good points. I am having a hard time reconciling that.

That said, she may have opened herself up to the question about whether she would be submissive to her husband as president since that is part of her stupid religious belief that she had made public before running for president. It definitely puts her in an uncomfortable position to express that belief and then run for president where she may give the appearance of having to do what her husband prefers while running the country.

If she had never made comments about a wife's role being submissive to her husband and then she got asked that question? That would be pretty fucking outrageous.

[AtheistCrusader]

6. Let me help.

This is what she said in 2006.

""My husband said, now you need to go and get a post-doctorate degree in tax law. Tax law? I hate taxes. Why should I go and do something like that?

But the Lord said, 'Be submissive. Wives you are to be submissive to your husband.' And so we moved to Virginia Beach, Virginia, and I went to William and Mary Law School there, for a post-doctorate degree in tax law. And I pursued this course of study.

Never had a tax course in my background, never had a desire for it, but by faith, I was going to be faithful to what I felt God was calling me to do through my husband.""

Flip the gender roles, and political party. Would you want a reporter to ask that guy if he was going to be the official, or if his spouse was? Because, I vote for the candidate, and expect the candidate to do the job, not his or her spouse.

I think it was a completely valid question, and at the most, reflects the patriarchal nature of her faith.

[Lucky Luciano]

7. yup - with you all the way. Thx for the extra details. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

5. HISTORICAL REVISIONISM AT WORK

Nope, nope nope, not going to get away with playing that card. There's a REASON she was asked THAT question, and it is not specifically because she is female. It's because of something she said in 2006. That was actually a valid question for Bachmann. It's part of her faith.

It's a tenet of her right-wing Christian fundie social structure. Asking her if she'd be so, is entirely valid, because the implication of her own faith is that her husband is the head of the house, that the woman be submissive.

This wasn't someone being externally rude/attacking her, this was someone concerned she would actually live the values she claimed, which has implications for a voter evaluating the individual candidate.

Remember this shit from 2006?

""My husband said, now you need to go and get a post-doctorate degree in tax law. Tax law? I hate taxes. Why should I go and do something like that?

But the Lord said, 'Be submissive. Wives you are to be submissive to your husband.' And so we moved to Virginia Beach, Virginia, and I went to William and Mary Law School there, for a post-doctorate degree in tax law. And I pursued this course of study.

Never had a tax course in my background, never had a desire for it, but by faith, I was going to be faithful to what I felt God was calling me to do through my husband.""

Because apparently Bachmann doesn't remember it.

Not a chance in hell I'd vote for her, of course, but even if a Democratic candidate said that, I, as a voter, would now have justifiable cause to wonder, who is the person I am voting for here?