Posted on 08/16/2011 6:21:14 AM PDT by Mamzelle
"Whatever the case, Bachmann's answer in Ames Thursday night was by far the most human moment of her appearance in the debate -- a far cry from her tough exchanges with former Minnesota Gov. (and now former candidate) Tim Pawlenty. At their best, debates tell us new things about candidates and allow us to learn more about aspects of their personalities we haven't seen before. Is there any doubt that moment in Ames on Thursday night did just that for Michele Bachmann?"
My larger concern was her answer. Respect is clearly different from submission. Bachman gave a political answer and not a correct Christian answer.
I was raised Catholic, so don’t take this wrong, but it seems that - since JFK - Catholics are exempt from these theological grillings, and it’s only conservative Protestants who who subjected to it. Catholic doctrine has as many points offensive to secularists as does conservative Protestantism - papal infallability, the real presence in the Eucharist, male-only priesthood, eternal hell, prohibition of divorce, views on abortion, contraception, and homosexuality - but it seems Catholic politicians are never grilled about these things, probably because they are usually Democrats and because they say stuff like, “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but . . . “
If Michele was smart (and she obviously is), she will stop trying to "explain" what she meant and, instead, launch into one of her talking points. As much as I hate talking points, this issue is going to garner her much more air time, face time and print time than any of her stated policy stances.
The best defense is a good offense. The Libturds are obviously going to put her on the defense every chance they get. She is going to have to learn how to take that ball away.
A correction of my statement - I think the Catholic Church does not prohibit divorce, it prohibits remarriage after divorce. And another Catholic belief alien to many secularists - a belief in demons and evil spirits. Palin was made to look like a rube because she believed in them, but the Catholic Church has its well-known exorcism ritual.
It seems that many conservative columnists are anti-woman when it comes to politics. Perhaps they feel threatened because they are insecure in their manhood.
Probably not, but that doesn't mean asking certain types of questions is always bigoted. Do I think the question was a "gotcha" type? Yes, I do. But I also think that those aspiring to public office should be able to explain how their faith informs their overall outlook and behavior. Such questions, however perceived, would have been quite useful in 2008. I don't think either candidate was prepared to honestly discuss such matters.
I am so disgusted with Fox these days.
If the Left would have pressed Billy Boy THIS hard on what “the definition of is-is”, we may have got the guy impeached for good and all.
Enough, this is BS!
For Bachmann to revisit this topic ad infinitum and at the will of the MSM is foolish. She has made herself clear and I should add, she made herself clear on a completely inane and insignificant issue. If you are a grown up, that is more than enough!!
Well Ann should know about "girly men."
You’re right, and NR is ostensibly a Catholic/neo-con-jewish organ these days.
Protestants need not apply. Other than Mittens Romney, who is LDS. They’re in the tank for Romney, big-time. But then, Romney has the credentials that NR wants to see: Ivy League degrees.
Catholic politicians aren't grilled on these things by the press and the pundits, because so many of them (those prominent on the national scene) don't believe any of it, neither the faith nor the morals, and everybody knows it.
If their own BISHOP questions their stand on bedrock right-and-wrong issues like, say, the intentional killing of the innocent, or the twisting of marriage to accommodate open perversion, it's the presstitutes and the pundits who cry "foul" and try to make the Bishop and everybody else shut up on these "divisive" issues.
Your correction is correct! :o)
*TO BYRON YORK:
I actually don't respect you anymore, FWIW.
---and nobody's going to question him on any part of it, not one phrase of it, not one word, because they see it as meaningless babble.
But don't try to mess with anybody's between-the-legs issues, or they'll shout you down with Anathemas -- and cut off your mike, and maybe more.
In 35+ years of debate-watching, which, including primary debates probably includes more than 150 debates, I have seen scores of "gotcha" questions on abortion directed at conservatives. I have never once seen a tough abortion question asked of a "pro-choice" candidate.
Proposed question (which has never been asked):
"Mr. Obama, you have a long held view that late term abortion should be legal. Many say that a fetus or unborn child going through this procedure suffers tormenting pain undergoing a late-term abortion. Do you believe the researchers and doctors who assert this are wrong in their assessment, and if so, what specifically is that opinion based on?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.