Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Questioning Bachmann

Posted by on Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 11:29 AM

Don't ask Michele Bachmann whether gay couples with kids are families. That's not a question Bachmann is willing to answer because she's running for president and that's not an important presidential-type issue question, David Gregory. But a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and deprive kids with gay parents of the benefits and protections of having married parents? That's a presidential issue right there! Ask away! Bachmann will also answer questions about whether gay people should serve in the military—guess what? She's going to singlehandedly reinstate DADT if she's elected president.

 

Comments (38) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
You can say that again!
Posted by Lymis on August 14, 2011 at 12:06 PM
Vince 2
"Your involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle it's bondage, it is personal bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement..." She's so open minded on the subject. But being married to that bitch would be bondage of the fucking worst magnitude. And electing her president would be national suicide.
Posted by Vince on August 14, 2011 at 12:21 PM
3
You can say that again!
Posted by six five on August 14, 2011 at 12:24 PM
4
You can say that again!
Posted by seatackled on August 14, 2011 at 12:34 PM
Puty 5
I liked the sneak peak into Dan's writing/editing we got from his accidental double-post. Also, it's terrifying that Bachmann has strong support.
Posted by Puty on August 14, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Gern Blanston 6
Maybe proofread it and give it another try Dan? The third time's the charm!
Posted by Gern Blanston on August 14, 2011 at 1:15 PM
venomlash 7
You can say that again!
Posted by venomlash on August 14, 2011 at 1:22 PM
Puty 8
At least twice more!
Posted by Puty on August 14, 2011 at 1:24 PM
9
once the syphilis gets to your brain the end comes rapidly, Danny.....:(
Posted by it gets bitter on August 14, 2011 at 1:38 PM
10
I for one can't think of anyone I'd rather see on the GOP ticket that Michele Bachmann. It's about time for a referendum on visions for this country, and we want a clear one--it would be nice if the GOP would nominate someone who is not afraid to say what they REALLY think so that when they lose, they can't say, "well, if we'd nominated a REAL conservative, we would have won."

Gays For Bachmann!
Posted by Gays for Bachmann on August 14, 2011 at 2:25 PM
11
hey Danny
your boy Rick came in better that expected in Iowa and with Pawlenty out moves up to third!

Pres Bachman...Pres Santorum......which does it for you?

silly question!

Danny wetdreams pumping santorum INTO Santorum.
while
Michelle just has nasty lady bits.....
Posted by now you see it- NOW YOU DON'T!!! on August 14, 2011 at 2:42 PM
12
Again! Again!
Posted by Sifu http://www.sifumark.com on August 14, 2011 at 2:43 PM
prompt 13
Hey troops. Remember all that training and changes we made to end DADT cause we realize that gay people are just as capable fighting for this country as anyone else? JK!
Posted by prompt on August 14, 2011 at 2:56 PM
Catalina Vel-DuRay 14
9, Michelle Bachmann has Syphilis? That explains so much...
Posted by Catalina Vel-DuRay http://www.danlangdon.com on August 14, 2011 at 3:07 PM
15
@14 FTW C.
Posted by Ken Mehlman on August 14, 2011 at 3:42 PM
16
Read the New Yorker piece on her and you won't wonder or laugh at anything she says. It clearly lays out her history of Christian fundamentalist indoctrination, especially the belief that all legal and governmental authorities must hew to God's word according to a literal (mis)interpretation of the Bible. She's the most frightening person running for President and that's saying a lot.
Posted by sarah68 on August 14, 2011 at 3:48 PM
17
Here's to hoping one of her children are gay.
Posted by AsherCapHill on August 14, 2011 at 3:49 PM
seandr 18
Bachmann represents the violent convulsions of a dying point of view. In five-ten years, she and her ilk will seem as hateful and barbaric as separate drinking fountains for "colored" people.

The fact is, her way of life is under attack, not by liberals, but by the inevitable forward march of history. The desperate, bug-eyed gasping and flailing certainly isn't pretty to watch, but it's nothing to be afraid of, either.
Posted by seandr on August 14, 2011 at 4:23 PM
Gou Tongzhi 19
It's interesting that in 1992 DADT was the "liberal" option. So, hey, at least now it's the right wing option, which is progress, right?
Posted by Gou Tongzhi on August 14, 2011 at 4:27 PM
20
@17 - Why would you hope for such a horrible thing on a fellow human being?

Remember this is only the GOP in Iowa. The rest of the state allowed gay marriage so I'm still hoping they remain on the right side. Majority rules
Posted by TheFrogandtheSquirrel on August 14, 2011 at 5:00 PM
21
17
Here's to hoping one of her children are gay.
..Posted by AsherCapHill on August 14, 2011 at 3:49 PM

-------------------------------------------------

There's only like 52 (or so including foster kids)...odds are really good!
Posted by SEATTLEBLUES SMARTER BROTHER on August 14, 2011 at 5:13 PM
22
Quit already with all these "gotcha questions" Dano!

What counts is what flavor of ice cream Bachmann prefers, although nobody in their right (or left) mind should vote for anyone who eats a hot dog or sausage without Grey Poupon, or Dijon or ketchup, for cripes sakes!

And what's all the emphasis on DADT??? You wan't every Gay in Amerika to continue supporting the aims of the American Empire??

What right does this country have to be firing off drone Hellfire missiles wherever it chooses to?

What right does this country have to keep invading any country it wishes to, yet ignores the horrendous human rights abuses in Bahrain, etc.?

Remember, Dano, "Empires are not about the efficient use of resources and the spread of happiness." (Iain Banks)

http://ny-image2.etsy.com/il_570xN.21387…
Posted by sgt_doom on August 14, 2011 at 5:20 PM
23
Danny, Santorum has been going about Iowa taking credit for the recall of the judges who approved homosexual marriage.
Are you going to let him get away with that?
Posted by is your feces frothy? on August 14, 2011 at 5:27 PM
24
@19 - In the New Yorker article it's clear she wants to roll back to the policy before DADT.

She and her husband follow a Christian ministry that wants to roll every thing back to before the Italian Renaissance as that was the beginning of gay hegemony. The founder of their sect had a special obsession with - guess which work of Renaissance art a severely homophobic minister would be obsessed with? - yes Michelangelo's David. It's source of all the Gays' power, it must be destroyed.
Posted by SoSea Resident on August 14, 2011 at 5:38 PM
25
Q: "So what are your concerns about the congressionally appointed super committee and current austerity measures tailspinning the country into a second Great Depression?"

A: ".....I'm running for President!"
Posted by Drew2u on August 14, 2011 at 5:54 PM
Will in Seattle 26
Every woman should have a gay husband like she does ...
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 14, 2011 at 6:10 PM
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 27

Isn't DADT what IBM mainframes used to store data on?
Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://yrihf.com on August 14, 2011 at 7:55 PM
Lord Basil 28
Good on Michele for avoiding that lying liberal trying to get her in a gotcha moment.

The fact is Americans don't want homosexuality and it's attendent marxism and fascism. They want freedom and strong families, not sissy oys running around the military trying to get our troops to wear women's undergarments.

Michele will stop this, and this is why the lying liberal drive by media will try with all their might to take her down.

Good luck with that!

Barack Hussein Obama, you have met your match!
Posted by Lord Basil http://lordbasil.blogspot.com/ on August 14, 2011 at 11:01 PM
29
Unfortunately a lot of you sound like people did before the 1st Tuesday in November, 2004, when we were so certain that Bush wouldn't be reelected that we laughed at the thought.

This is not an amusing situation. Her way of life is NOT "under attack" by the march of history. The march of recent American history has led directly to Michelle Bachmann.
Posted by sarah68 on August 14, 2011 at 11:21 PM
igub 30
Bachmann - The world's modern day Lady Macbeth.
Posted by igub on August 14, 2011 at 11:53 PM
31
I know this is off-topic, but please people, help me fight the fucking paid trolls commenting at the Boston Globe.

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/a…

Posted by Marrena on August 15, 2011 at 4:19 AM
Mudkips 32
@28

Oh how cute, another half-wit with a malformed opinion! I read through some of your comments and while you claim to have fought in Vietnam, you present yourself as a half informed and delusory 20 year old trolling for lulz. I can only hope this is the case and you really aren't that paranoid and stupid, otherwise get your meds checked the next time you make an appointment =)

P.S. No one uses ROTFLMAO!!! anymore
Posted by Mudkips on August 15, 2011 at 5:03 AM
33
To clarify: The issue is so important that we should change the Constitution to prohibit recognition of marriages and families, but so petty that you shouldn't have to explain yourself?
Posted by Kaliann on August 15, 2011 at 7:32 AM
seandr 34
@29:
If anyone in 2004 was certain that a wartime president would lose a re-election, they didn't pay attention in history class.

You're right that we shouldn't sit idly by while Bachmann degrades herself and the country with her idiocy. If she somehow gets the nod from Republican party, however, she won't take a single state in the general election.
Posted by seandr on August 15, 2011 at 8:26 AM
35
http://bachmanneyezed.tumblr.com/
Posted by in other news on August 15, 2011 at 9:08 AM
venomlash 36
@28: Csodálatos történetét, testvér.
Posted by venomlash on August 15, 2011 at 10:30 AM
37
@ 28- love how people lump in all these TOTALLY RANDOM things with homosexuality....like facism! Communism! Wearing women's underwear! (well, I suppose that gay women often do wear women's undies...)
But seriously, since when are these things inextricably linked with being gay? Have you never heard of a gay conservative? Should we now all assume that all conservatives are clones of each other?

Also, why does it matter whether people wear a certain type of underwear? It's UNDER THEIR CLOTHES! What happens in the bedroom is no business of the government.
Posted by scotti8 on August 15, 2011 at 3:01 PM
Posted by secretuniverse on September 21, 2011 at 10:31 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy