Michele Bachmann For President

If the presidential election were held today conservative radio talk show host Glenn Beck would cast his vote for Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. For Beck, the choice was between Bachmann and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, the New York Daily News reported.


"Michele Bachmann is no lightweight. Neither is Rick Santorum. Neither one of them are going to give in the end on their principles. They'll go out in flames," he said on his radio show Thursday according the paper.


Beck was torn between the Tea Party favorite and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.


"Michele Bachmann is no lightweight. Neither is Rick Santorum. Neither one of them are going to give in the end on their principles. They'll go out in flames," he said on his radio show Thursday, where he asked his co-hosts who they'd vote for if they had a "gun to your head."


The Fox News host then blasted the mainstream media for what he said was unfair treatment of Bachmann, including allegations that her family-owned Christian counseling clinic urged patients to "pray away the gay."


The media "needs to take anybody that is going to change course, they need to take them out," the ex-Fox News host said. "...Nobody is going to be talking about praying the gay away in 12 months from now when our economy is in absolute shambles."


Beck also weighed in on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.


"I think he's an honorable man, but I don't trust him," said Beck, acknowledging that Romney would "decimate" Obama in the debates.


He then gave an ominous warning, predicting "race riots are on the way."


"The next president needs to prepare to be Abraham Lincoln, be willing to fall on his sword. The next president needs to be willing to sacrifice his life because the choices that this next president will have to face are going to be awful," he said.


"I firmly believe race riots are on the way. They are being encouraged. The Obama administration will take this country down. If it looks like they are losing - the uber-left - they will take it down.

Michele Bachmann 'Submissive' Wife Idea a Matter of Interpretation

At Thursday’s GOP Presidential debate, many believed Michele Bachmann’s answer regarding the question of submitting to her husband as showing weakness. Many critics questioned her perspective on leadership and authority.

Yet the idea of submission turns out to be central to what the President of the United States must do in order to lead our country.

Bachmann answered by saying submission equals respect. “I respect my husband,” she responded. “He’s a wonderful godly man. We respect each other and we love each other.”

The words respect and love would not be found as synonyms for submission in any thesaurus. Submission is often used as a negative connotation dealing with slavery, abuse or manipulation. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines submission as “an act of submitting to the authority or control of another.”

It appears that submission lacks freedom.

Bachmann’s belief of submission differs from what has been ingrained in today’s culture. How could it be that submission equals respect or even love?

Take for example a marriage proposal. Popping the question is the ultimate expression of love and in return asking, “Do you love me enough to spend your life with me?” The man is disposing his power by showing vulnerability and giving the option up to the woman. She has the choice to say yes, no, or even make a dramatic exit by running away in tears not being able to decide. It is a risk he is taking; a risk that exudes love.

Granted that the woman says yes, marriage ensues and the concept of submission again comes into play. In the context of the question Bachmann answered, submission meant putting her husband ahead of herself. Sacrificial love is another name for it. While it is a foreign concept for most of us, sacrificial love aims to help others—submission by serving.

In another way, take the perspective from two parents who see their grown child make choices that ruin his or her life and while they may try to direct their child in the right path, out of love they must ultimately surrender their will and let the child decide for him or herself.

Love does not impose.

Biblically, the story of submission is shown by God sending Jesus down to the earth to become human. He submits himself to death in order for the curse of sin to be broken for all of mankind.

Submission is the greatest act of love and respect.

Finally, take the President of the United States. While the president leads, guides and aims to be the stabilizer of the nation, ultimately he or she must grant the power to the people of the country to decide for themselves. It is in their power to vote, to live however they choose and to exercise their innate rights. We are a country of freedom, not dictatorship.

As the presidential election grows closer, the candidates must learn more and more the art of submission. Submitting to the mercy of the media through every step they take, every trip they make and too often than not, every persona they fake is part of the deal. Their ability to submit and respond with grace weeds out the weak from the strong.

Following the chorus of boos after the submission question was asked during Thursday’s debate, Bachmann’s answer followed with a celebratory cheer from the crowd. Her answer on the surface dealt with the way she treats her husband, but it also had larger implications. It expressed the way she looks at the world, the lens she views our country out of.

If Michele Bachmann were to become president, her act of submission would not be the kind that is weak. It would not be the kind of submission that gives up. To her, submission is showing complete sacrifice to the nation.

One of the most talked about moments at Thursday night's GOP debate on the Fox News Channel came when Bachmann of Minnesota was asked a question that raised some eyebrows. The question stemmed from a speech she gave in 2006 when she was running for Congress.

Bachmann told a church in Brooklyn Park, Minn., that she hated taxes, but went on to study tax law in order to be "submissive" to her husband.

"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 says, 'Be submissive.' Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands," Bachmann told the crowd at the Living Word Christian Center. "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 thought God was calling me to do through my husband, and I finished that course of that study."

Her response Thursday night to the Washington Examiner's Byron York was broader but no less faithful. Bachmann said she loved her husband and was "so proud of him."

"What submission means to us, if that's what your question is, it means respect. I respect my husband. He's a wonderful, Godly man and a great father, and he respects me as his wife," she told York and the millions watching. "That's how we operate our marriage. We respect each other, we love each other, and I've been so grateful that we've been able to build a home together."

The teaching is rooted in the fifth chapter of Ephesians in the New Testament: "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

The mainstream media and others are trying to wrap their arms around the concept they don't understand," Brody said. "Even though tens of millions not just evangelicals, but Christians around the country understand they are being put on the spot to explain.

Although Brody thought the question was unfair, Bachmann's spokeswoman Alice Stewart said she saw it "as an opportunity for her to clear up any concerns people may have had about that word. Clearly, people view that word differently. But for Michele and her husband that's the way they describe their relationship in terms of having a mutual respect for each other; and they do, they have a fantastic marriage, a very loving couple, and when they're using that term it's their expression of how they have a mutual respect and love for each other."

And Bachmann's Iowa campaign chairman Kent Sorenson agreed, also saying it was a "great opportunity."

"Anybody can ask any question they want. I don't think she's afraid to answer those questions. The audience sounded like they had a little different response," Sorenson said.

Bachmann's husband didn't shy away from commenting today at the Iowa State fair. "I think the fact that she is talking about two people who respect, honor, and communicate to each other about decisions just makes a lot of sense," Marcus Bachmann told ABC News. "I think the American people can see that that makes for a good marriage.

Bachmann's Post-Debate Reaction: Pawlenty Attacks Needed to Be Addressed

One of Tim Pawlenty’s laugh lines last night was a jibe at Mitt Romney’s personal wealth; after declaring that he’d mow the lawn of any American who could identify President Obama’s plan for entitlements reform, Pawlenty said that offer was limited to one acre of lawn for Romney.

Continue Reading

Pawlenty, who talks frequently about his blue-collar upbringing, said at POLITICO’s Playbook Breakfast Friday that he was “just having some fun” with the comment, and didn’t mean it as an attack on Romney.

“I was just having some fun with that, pulling Mitt’s chain a little bit,” Pawlenty said.

But a more serious underlying point, Pawlenty said, is that voters want to know about the backgrounds of the presidential candidates and who they can relate to.

“I think if people are running for president, want to be president, the electorate wants to know who are you, where do you come from,” Pawlenty said. “I don’t suggest that my life story is better or worse than anybody else’s. It’s just different.”

Pawlenty mentioned that his father was a truck driver and his mother died when he was young, and mentioned that he “got lucky, got a job at a grocery store, worked in a union position” and worked his way through college.

“Those are the kinds of things people want to know, because if you’re president, they’re gonna want to know, who is this person and does your life story kind of line up with theirs?” Pawlenty said.

Circling back to Romney, Pawlenty continued: “In Mitt’s case, he’s got an incredibly successful background and I think we should applaud it and celebrate it”

my standard for raising the debt ceiling was yes, "Cut, Cap and Balance," but also we had to have a full repeal of Obamacare. My opinion has been, I would not raise the debt ceiling right now because we're almost up to $17 trillion.

When I came into office, Sean, we were at $8.67 trillion. In a little over four years, we've almost doubled the debt. Standard and Poor's essentially proved me right what I was saying. We are not in a position to be able to repay our debt when we continue to spend this money.

We didn't have to default. We what we had to do is let markets know we won't default. We will get our AAA credit rating back. We're going to pay the military. We're going to pay our senior citizens.

But then, we're not going to kick the can down the road either. We're going to cut spending now and prioritize. That is not an extremist view. That's the reality view that we have to take because right now piper is asking to be paid. It's hit the fan. We've got to deal with the spending now.

It is. Yes, it goes with the territory. I mean, honestly, America had a punch in the gut this week. Let's face it. The president got a $2.4 trillion blank check. We got $21 billion in cuts, not much of a deal.

Two days later the stock market dropped over 500 points, then we lost for the first time in the history of the country the AAA credit rating then we saw a terrible tragedy over the weekend and all told we've lost 1,500 points in the stock market. All the president could do was blame earthquakes and the Tea Party? We've got a problem so who cares about a magazine cover.

but I introduced that because I mean, quite seriously that is symbolic of what is wrong with Washington, isn't it? Because when you're the federal government telling you what light bulb you can use and you can't use? That is why I introduced that bill because when I'm in the White House as president, Sean, you can buy any light bulb you want to buy.