On NBC’s Meet the Press, host David Gregory grilled Rep. Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.) on her political and religious views.
Gregory first narrowed in on Bachmann’s refusal to vote for an increase in the debt ceiling. “Why should we trust your judgment that that was the right thing to do?” he asked.
“Because that’s the judgment of the people of this country,” Bachmann replied.
“But this is why we have elected representatives, Congresswoman, who actually know the true financial impact of a step like this,” Gregory retorted. “Would you have voted the same way if you were the deciding vote?”
“Remember, I introduced a bill that would not have had the United States default; the president did not,” Bachmann said. She then criticized the president for warning senior citizens that they might not get their Social Security checks. “He’s the one who threatened default.”
Later, Gregory interrogated Bachmann about her religious views. After playing a clip of the congresswoman quoting the biblical instruction for wives to “submit” to their husbands, Gregory asked, “Is that your view of women in America?”
When Bachmann argued that “submission” meant “respect,” Gregory joked, “Congresswoman, I didn’t even have to check with my wife, and I know those two things aren’t equal.”
“Well in our house, it is,” Bachmann shot back.
Near the end of the segment, Gregory asked Bachmann about her views on gays and lesbians. He played a clip of Bachmann saying that the gay lifestyle was “personal bondage, personal despair, and personal enslavement.”
“I am running for the presidency of the United States, I’m not running to be anyone’s judge,” Bachmann replied.
Folks, have you ever noticed that the LGBT crowd likes to say that this election should not be about LGBT? Then their running dogs are sure to quiz candidates about LGBT in detail, using it as a litmus test.
Gregory attacks because she is a woman, plain and simple, his tone is of someone who has no respect for her. He would never do this to a Democratic candidate or politician. I don't mind tough questions, and they should get tough questions, but condescension and double standards are not journalism. The day this mamby pamby asked Barney Frank to explain himself in such terms, or Barack Obama is a day i would love to see.
"Gregory attacks because she is a woman, plain and simple..."
A conservative woman. If Debbie Whatsername was on the show, Gregory would be very deferential. But he has no respect for conservatives, much less a conservative woman.
Shades of Charles Gibson's interview of Sarah Palin. It wasn't just the "gotcha" questions he would never have asked John McCain, Barack Obama or Joe Biden, but a tone and body language that reeked of contempt for her as a person, as well as a candidate. Who will ever forget Gibson looking over his glasses and down his nose at Sarah Palin?
I hope Mr. Gibson feels that interview was worth the abrupt and disgraceful end to his long, and previously respected, career in journalism. Considering where Mrs. Palin is today, that interview hurt him a lot more than it hurt her. Hopefully, Gregory's interview of Michele Bachmann will have the same result.
I don't particularly care for Gibson, and I thought there was much about that interview not to like: The lighting was horrible, the camera angles made Palin look much more diminutive that she really is (and I have to believe that was intentional) and Gibson - with the way he looked down his glasses at her (again, intentionally) all were condemnable.
But, I don't think there was a single question in that interview that was a "gotcha" question. Not one. And, the same goes for the Couric interview. Every question was reasonable and frankly expected, considering that this was a political figure that was clearly new on the national scene, and completely unknown to a great percentage of America.
Palin just did not possess the media skills to effectively blunt Gibson's arrogant and aggressive probing or to parry Couric's passive-aggressive sniping. Considering she came from a media market that would be smaller than the media market surrounding Austin, TX, that's completely understandable. Palin just wasn't used to jousting with people who actually communicate on a national stage and do it for a living.
The left and the media always want to accuse conservatives of being obsessed with social issues and sex and gays. But it's not the socons who obsess over sex - it's the left. In the normal course of events Bachmann and Santorum would be talking about jobs and foreign policy and interest rates and could talk for 24 hours straight without suddenly veering into tangents about submissive wives or sodomy. But Gregory and his ilk won't let them.
Isn't that sickening? A group of people who deem themselves enlightened for helping to cause the over-sexualization of our culture would blame their opponents of being obsessed with the sex lives of others?
Not only can they not comprehend how the issue of DISLOYALTY is distinctive from a preoccupation with sex. But they accuse their opponents of that which better explains the motivations of the accuser.
And that is how they operate on EVERY issue. They obsess about people's skin color, but WE are the racists, for example.
Saul Alinsky would be SO PROUD!
On sex, it reminds me of going out to dinner with liberal friends in DC and NYC. They LOVE to play the "game" of "Spot 'em!"
"Spot 'em" is an activity by which liberals -- who are so "ACCEPTING" of the choice of sexual partners of others -- sit in public places and try to see if they can guess who among them in the room might be homosexual.
The socialist mindset is, to be sure, thoroughly polluted.
Barack Obama talked a lot about his religious faith in the early days of his 2008 campaign and credited one man with leading him to Christ, a man he called his dear friend. Yet, when the character and politics of the man who led Mr. Obama to Christianity came to light and threatened to derail his campaign, we were told by people like Mr. Gregory that his personal religious experience, as well as the man who most influenced his faith, had nothing to do with his ability to lead. And, of course, how racist it was of anyone to mention it. So why are Mr. Gregroy and others so concerned about how Mrs. Bachmann's faith will impact her ability to lead?
Jenna, that was my thoughts when reading Gregory's line of questioning.
It seems when someone is truly comfortable with their Christianity (not putting on airs like Obama or Clinton), they get very tough, almost judgmental questions about it. The press goes out of their way to paint them as some sort of extremist, weirdo, oddball, etc.
Unlike Barack Obama, Bachmann wants to use the power of the state to enforce her personal brand of Christianity. That is why it is important that voters have a clear idea of exactly what she believes. Plus, she became a tax lawyer on her husband's orders, despite the fact that she didn't want to. It's up to her to convince people that Marcus won't be running the country should she win. Which she won't, so you all should really relax.
@Living -- Part of the problem is Christians being unable to clearly and succinctly answer the question for their faith. Simply: I adhere to a worldview of a loving, forgiving God who understands my failings but accepts me anyway. My conscience is settled through the wise counsel of others and through His guidance.
First, they truly don't believe Obama to be a Christian, at least a serious one. Second, Bachmann is a Republican, so hypocrisy is allowed. And of course third, she's a pro-life conservative, which means you loose the hounds.
Denroy: You're probably right. If liberals thought Barack Obama was as devoted to Christianity as he claims, it might be an issue. On the other hand, liberals have a double standard that applies to religion as well as other issues, so he might have received the required pass. Or perhaps because the type of Christianity Obama was drawn to, the anti-American, anti-white, victimhood Christianity of Jeremiah Wright, is in keeping with liberal values and principles, no grilling was required.
Agreed @denroy. Obama's claim to be a Christian is like his original claim to be against gay marriage: his supporters know he doesn't mean it and won't act on it, but must say it to satisfy us rubes in flyover country.
When she was running for the House, she had Governor Pawlenty campaigning for her. Now that he's out of the race, he was an important voice that she'll call to thank and try to get his support.
But during the race, she kept saying he's Obama. Whatever. Go adjust your 3 inch fake eyelashes. They go well with your fake resume and fake campaign.
Gregory seeks to drive a wedge between GOP factions, the idea being that if the LW media can paint Bachmann as a religious nut, the moderate establishment side of the GOP might see her as unelectable.
Thanks again, Byron York, for slapping a little grease and blood on Bachmann just before she hikes through the gator swamp.
Folks, have you ever noticed that the LGBT crowd likes to say that this election should not be about LGBT? Then their running dogs are sure to quiz candidates about LGBT in detail, using it as a litmus test.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGregory attacks because she is a woman, plain and simple, his tone is of someone who has no respect for her. He would never do this to a Democratic candidate or politician. I don't mind tough questions, and they should get tough questions, but condescension and double standards are not journalism. The day this mamby pamby asked Barney Frank to explain himself in such terms, or Barack Obama is a day i would love to see.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Gregory attacks because she is a woman, plain and simple..."
A conservative woman. If Debbie Whatsername was on the show, Gregory would be very deferential. But he has no respect for conservatives, much less a conservative woman.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou're right, I did mean "conservative woman" but posted it before I realized my mistake.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Whatshername"?
Her name is "Slipperface" Schultz. Look closely -- it is sliding off her head, like a grease-paint mask.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseShades of Charles Gibson's interview of Sarah Palin. It wasn't just the "gotcha" questions he would never have asked John McCain, Barack Obama or Joe Biden, but a tone and body language that reeked of contempt for her as a person, as well as a candidate. Who will ever forget Gibson looking over his glasses and down his nose at Sarah Palin?
I hope Mr. Gibson feels that interview was worth the abrupt and disgraceful end to his long, and previously respected, career in journalism. Considering where Mrs. Palin is today, that interview hurt him a lot more than it hurt her. Hopefully, Gregory's interview of Michele Bachmann will have the same result.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusewhere is Palin today? She lost the vice-presidency, resigned from her governorship, and then became a reality tv star.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't particularly care for Gibson, and I thought there was much about that interview not to like: The lighting was horrible, the camera angles made Palin look much more diminutive that she really is (and I have to believe that was intentional) and Gibson - with the way he looked down his glasses at her (again, intentionally) all were condemnable.
But, I don't think there was a single question in that interview that was a "gotcha" question. Not one. And, the same goes for the Couric interview. Every question was reasonable and frankly expected, considering that this was a political figure that was clearly new on the national scene, and completely unknown to a great percentage of America.
Palin just did not possess the media skills to effectively blunt Gibson's arrogant and aggressive probing or to parry Couric's passive-aggressive sniping. Considering she came from a media market that would be smaller than the media market surrounding Austin, TX, that's completely understandable. Palin just wasn't used to jousting with people who actually communicate on a national stage and do it for a living.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe left and the media always want to accuse conservatives of being obsessed with social issues and sex and gays. But it's not the socons who obsess over sex - it's the left. In the normal course of events Bachmann and Santorum would be talking about jobs and foreign policy and interest rates and could talk for 24 hours straight without suddenly veering into tangents about submissive wives or sodomy. But Gregory and his ilk won't let them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseoh please. Bachmann has been obsessed over same sex marriage since her days in the state legislature.
Was that Gregory's fault too?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIsn't that sickening? A group of people who deem themselves enlightened for helping to cause the over-sexualization of our culture would blame their opponents of being obsessed with the sex lives of others?
Not only can they not comprehend how the issue of DISLOYALTY is distinctive from a preoccupation with sex. But they accuse their opponents of that which better explains the motivations of the accuser.
And that is how they operate on EVERY issue. They obsess about people's skin color, but WE are the racists, for example.
Saul Alinsky would be SO PROUD!
On sex, it reminds me of going out to dinner with liberal friends in DC and NYC. They LOVE to play the "game" of "Spot 'em!"
"Spot 'em" is an activity by which liberals -- who are so "ACCEPTING" of the choice of sexual partners of others -- sit in public places and try to see if they can guess who among them in the room might be homosexual.
The socialist mindset is, to be sure, thoroughly polluted.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBarack Obama talked a lot about his religious faith in the early days of his 2008 campaign and credited one man with leading him to Christ, a man he called his dear friend. Yet, when the character and politics of the man who led Mr. Obama to Christianity came to light and threatened to derail his campaign, we were told by people like Mr. Gregory that his personal religious experience, as well as the man who most influenced his faith, had nothing to do with his ability to lead. And, of course, how racist it was of anyone to mention it. So why are Mr. Gregroy and others so concerned about how Mrs. Bachmann's faith will impact her ability to lead?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJenna, that was my thoughts when reading Gregory's line of questioning.
It seems when someone is truly comfortable with their Christianity (not putting on airs like Obama or Clinton), they get very tough, almost judgmental questions about it. The press goes out of their way to paint them as some sort of extremist, weirdo, oddball, etc.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUnlike Barack Obama, Bachmann wants to use the power of the state to enforce her personal brand of Christianity. That is why it is important that voters have a clear idea of exactly what she believes. Plus, she became a tax lawyer on her husband's orders, despite the fact that she didn't want to. It's up to her to convince people that Marcus won't be running the country should she win. Which she won't, so you all should really relax.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Living -- Part of the problem is Christians being unable to clearly and succinctly answer the question for their faith. Simply: I adhere to a worldview of a loving, forgiving God who understands my failings but accepts me anyway. My conscience is settled through the wise counsel of others and through His guidance.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFirst, they truly don't believe Obama to be a Christian, at least a serious one. Second, Bachmann is a Republican, so hypocrisy is allowed. And of course third, she's a pro-life conservative, which means you loose the hounds.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDenroy: You're probably right. If liberals thought Barack Obama was as devoted to Christianity as he claims, it might be an issue. On the other hand, liberals have a double standard that applies to religion as well as other issues, so he might have received the required pass. Or perhaps because the type of Christianity Obama was drawn to, the anti-American, anti-white, victimhood Christianity of Jeremiah Wright, is in keeping with liberal values and principles, no grilling was required.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAgreed @denroy. Obama's claim to be a Christian is like his original claim to be against gay marriage: his supporters know he doesn't mean it and won't act on it, but must say it to satisfy us rubes in flyover country.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseShe is so disingenuous.
When she was running for the House, she had Governor Pawlenty campaigning for her. Now that he's out of the race, he was an important voice that she'll call to thank and try to get his support.
But during the race, she kept saying he's Obama. Whatever. Go adjust your 3 inch fake eyelashes. They go well with your fake resume and fake campaign.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGregory seeks to drive a wedge between GOP factions, the idea being that if the LW media can paint Bachmann as a religious nut, the moderate establishment side of the GOP might see her as unelectable.
Thanks again, Byron York, for slapping a little grease and blood on Bachmann just before she hikes through the gator swamp.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse