(CNN)- Thursday night in the Fox News GOP debate in Ames, Iowa, congresswoman Michele Bachmann, R-Minnesota, was asked by columnist Byron York whether she would be "submissive to her husband" if she were elected president.
Before the congresswoman had a chance to answer, a chorus of boos rang down from the audience.
While Michele thinks she could fix the U.S. credit rating in 20 minutes, I am reminded of the market going from over 14,000 to just under 8000 under Bush in less than a year. She seemed submissive then, too.
That is not the question that I would asked with a religous theme. I would have asked about how is that Christians can spread the word through politics and remain true to The Word. As it is written in Ezekial 14:10
Therefore, this is what the LORD says about the prophets who are prophesying in my name: I did not send them, yet they are saying, 'No sword or famine will touch this land.' Those same prophets will perish by sword and famine.
This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit and have seen nothing!
I didn’t like “Submissive” question even audience disagree with that question but they way she answered clever and impressive
Another interesting moment was Newt Gingrich Vs Chris Wallace
When Newt said congress must go back work now was good
Ron Paul as usual did well
Overall debate was horrible the way they moderate the debate was suck
1) all the candidate didn’t allow to answer same question
2) some got more time than others
3) final picture of the debate look like FOX is deciding who is the nominee
I can't stand this lady, but this question was inappropriate, to say it nicely. No one is asking the men if they expect their wives to be "submissive'
Soooooo -- that means all of her "presidential decisions" would REALLY be those of her husband. Maybe HE should run and be vetted by the media (co-presidents anyone?).
Michele Bacmann subsmissive? Somebody needs a drug test!
Is this constitutional???
ALL of her "presidential decisions" would REALLY be those of her husband. Maybe HE should run and be vetted by the media (co-presidents anyone?).
As a Christian and firm believer of the Bible – this applies in a household where the husband FULLY supports the wife spiritually and financially. No where in the Bible does God ask a woman to go to work. Since I have had to LEAVE the household this no longer applies for me. Women who have to bring in their equal share, bare children, run the household, stay beautiful and God forbid go to war should NOT have to be submissive as men gave that up YEARS ago when they started to rely on their wives for support. This is a sad but true fact.
That one did throw her......and it was a dirty trick, kind of question. Very sexist thing to do, actually.
It is interesting that when Gingrich got the best of Wallace, the media then said Gingrich "lost", when in fact he won. Just goes to show how "objective" the media really is. They are going after Gingrich, because he got the best of them. Really petty, on the part of the media......but then we all know how the media really is.
Rudy NYC wrote: This is not the question that I would asked with a religious theme".
There are many other scriptures you & your Liberal Democrat friends need to adhere.....one whic comes to mind...."In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread" Gen 3:19.......that means man is to WORK for their sustinence. And, "if any would not work, neither should he eat". II Thess 3:10b
The greatest problem we face as a nation is 2-fold.....Return to God....& Stop expecting a Nanny State to take care of those who refuse to work simply because people like you & your friends believe you are "owed" something....I, & millions do not think like you. I never received a dime of help from the government, my family, friends or any one....I worked hard all my life & am successful due to my hard work & God's blessing........simply because I have does not mean I owe you.....I only owe you the Truth, which is this; Jesus, God's Son died for our sins & He offers eternal Life to ..."whosoever will believeth
In Him.". Trust God, stop expecting something for nothing, & get off Welfare!
This was an UNFAIR question but then again, what's FAIR in any debate? I think Bachmann handled it well but she will still lose after Iowa!
The only thing that needs to be or is going to be submissive is the Democratic party after the 2012 election. It’s about time we get a leader in the White House, anyone can beat Obama in the 2012 election; Romney, Palin, Pawlenty, Bachmann, Gingrich and maybe Paul could easily beat Obama in a massive land slide win.
"No one is asking the men if they expect their wives to be "submissive'". However, none of the men's wives are running for the highest elected office in the land. If bachman should be elected, who would be making national policy decisions – her or her husband?
Wait? Why did they BOO?
Lets start separating some church and state.
While I could careless about the GOP, that was a dumb question and just go to show most of the GOP is stuck in the past!!
Yeah... submissive like a doberman is submissive!!! Egads, does the lunacy ever end?
I agree with Annie-the question was inappropriate. There is a bit of difference between respect and submission though.
She opened herself up to this question by her own past words and actions. had it been out of nowhere and based on nothing, sure, I would agree that it would be inappropriate, but when a candidate for the highest offiec int he country says something questionable a couple years before running, then they SHOULD be questioned on it, even if it's an uncomfortable topic. Telling people that she did not want to study tax law but did so because her husband wanted her to and the bible told her to submit...that made this question completely fair game.
"No one is asking the men if they expect their wives to be "submissive'"
None of the men have made public comments in the past opening the door for that kind of question.
Sorry the question was very appropriate because she has wrapped herself in the shroud of turin. Her theocracy-based positions are very much "fair game". It is she that said she submitted to her husbands view on what her career should be; those were HER WORDS.
Michele lied when she answered the question so as to pander to feminists. Yes a husband should respect his wife but the biblical use of the word submit IS NOT as a replacement for RESPECT. The bible means that the husbands judgement, experiences and worldliness make him the proper decision maker, not the woman. Therefore, the woman is to SUBMIT [YIELD] to the man.
Now, I know many agnostic & atheist women will reject this as "stone age" thinking but that`s what it means in the context and the spirit of when Michele said it.
If she disavows that meaning then she might as well disavow the rest of the words of the bible.
Leviticus speaks of men laying together as an abomination, Does Michele want to reject or spin those words too?
Don`t shot the messenger [mey. Look at her words, her beliefs, the Christian Right`s past behavior and the hipocracy that is exhibited when confronted with their inconvinent truths.
BTW – New York mag has a long, detailed article that helps voters understand the role theocracy would play in Bachmann administration. It gives history on her associations and example of how she has lived her ideaology.
Annie, listen, she is a stupid, totally.....o.k, please do not let them bring religion to politics, they do not blend in together...o.k, god bless...I can not stand this lady, Perry, and Tim, etc, GOP thugs sell this nation to corporate thugs, not to care for Middle class America....Iowa, do not be idiotic...god bless...