Gay Patriot Header Image

Bachmann Sidesteps Gay Issues on “Meet the Press”

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 7:26 pm - August 14, 2011.
Filed under: 2012 Presidential Election,Gay Politics

This is interesting:

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) was peppered Sunday with questions about her thoughts on gay rights, but largely refused to engage them, arguing that those issues aren’t on the front of voters’ minds.

“I am running for the presidency of the United States. I’m not running to be anyone’s judge,” Bachmann said on “Meet the Press.”

The winner of the Ames straw poll this weekend faced aggressive questioning in several of her appearances on the Sunday morning talk show circuit related to her opposition to same-sex marriage and controversial past statements toward gays and lesbians.

. . . .

She’s ducked most questions about her personal opinions toward gays and lesbians, staying on message with a jobs and economy-focused message.

Do like the line about her not running to be anyone’s judge; would be nice if she could build upon that as Herman Cain has.  If she wants to win the votes of socially moderate suburbanites, in both the Republican primaries and general election, she’d going to have to balance her attitudes toward gay people with the public’s increasing social tolerance.

This sidestepping suggests she recognizes how her beliefs could detract from her economic message.  But, she has yet to embrace a live-and-let-live policy consistent with her that message.  A sidestepping step in the right direction perhaps, but not far enough.

Share

22 Comments

  1. If she wants to win the votes of socially moderate suburbanites, in both the Republican primaries and general election….. This sidestepping suggests she recognizes how her beliefs could detract from her conservative message.

    Uhm, those beliefs ARE her conservative message! She’s running away from them to try and appear less Conservative to those not considered part of the base. It’s a good strategy, but a failed one. When you consider the Bachmann’s history with “reparative” therapy, that they not only support it, but participate in it, they have the most extreme views concerning gays of any candidate out there, and there is absolutely no way they can side step this.

    Comment by Sonicfrog — August 14, 2011 @ 7:42 pm - August 14, 2011

  2. I will respect Rep. Bachmann if she confirms her beliefs and adheres to them. Any other “explaining away” and topic avoidance is merely political cant in her own mind. Surely we have sufficient “sidestepping” in the present Administration.

    Comment by Bryan — August 14, 2011 @ 8:10 pm - August 14, 2011

  3. I agree with #1 & #2. Sorry but you missed the boat on this one Daniel. Sidestepping the issues is a step in the wrong direction for anyone, any way you look at it.

    Comment by Eddie — August 14, 2011 @ 9:07 pm - August 14, 2011

  4. The bigger problem is that as popularity grows within the GOP, and the fact that she won the Iowa straw poll, this will only solidify in many peoples minds that Bachmann’s views on gays ARE the mainstream views of all conservatives.

    Comment by Sonicfrog — August 14, 2011 @ 9:17 pm - August 14, 2011

  5. Michelle Bachmann wants a constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. This would be the first time one group’s civil liberties would be restricted over another group’s by constitutional amendment. Personally, I love the Ron Paul approach….take the government out of the marriage business (like it used to be) and allow two couples, regardless of their gender, to have a state certificated union. I bet if this happened, gays and lesbians would find a name for it, have a ceremony or celebration and it would be fabulous. I TiVo’d today’s Meet the Press, but, especially based on your blog post, I haven’t decided if I want to watch it or not….not sure if I am in the mood to yell at the TV. LOL

    Comment by Tom — August 14, 2011 @ 9:18 pm - August 14, 2011

  6. Michele Bachmann wins Iowa straw poll, husband still gay…

    The Daily Show – Comedy Repression Therapy Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook Dear God in heaven, how does Michele Bachmann not know her husband is gay? As Jon Stewart notes in the vide…

    Trackback by Cynthia Yockey, A Conservative Lesbian — August 14, 2011 @ 10:08 pm - August 14, 2011

  7. Eddie, I see side-stepping as a step in the right direction in that she, in taking this action, indicates that she believes economic issues should be the focus. But, it as per the concluding line of this post, it does nothing to ease my concerns about her.

    And Sonic, great point in #4. She didn’t even win a majority and then only a few votes ahead of a libertarian crank in an unrepresentative sample of Iowa Republicans. She doesn’t come close to representing the GOP, just one segment of the party, but the MSM will use this insignificant victory to make her the face of the opposition to their much beloved (but outside of the nation’s capital and its media representatives, increasingly unpopular incumbent.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — August 14, 2011 @ 11:15 pm - August 14, 2011

  8. It looks like the are natives restless as they are coming to grips with reality that the liberal wings of the Democrat and Republican Party will be put into permanent minority status after choosing to punt in the debt debate. Should have chosen the CCB.

    Comment by rjligier — August 15, 2011 @ 1:48 am - August 15, 2011

  9. If she wants to win the votes of socially moderate suburbanites, in both the Republican primaries and general election, she’d going to have to balance her attitudes toward gay people with the public’s increasing social tolerance.

    Shorter Dan “No social issues! no social issues! no social issues! — Hey! Answer those questions about social issues!”

    She says she’s not running to be anyone’s judge, and wants to focus on the economy & jobs — exactly what you’ve claimed you wanted all along– but now that’s not good enough for you! You want her to commit to YOUR stance on social issues.

    You want to Dan, Ive said it before and I will say it again. You never had any intention of dropping social issues, indeed, you never have. You only wanted those opposed to your positions to drop them and sit down while you move the ball down the field.

    You’ve been exceedingly intellectually dishonest all along, as you illustrate here, yet again, to everyone but apparently yourself.

    Not that you’re going to actually own up to it. I know better than that too.

    Comment by AmericanElephant — August 15, 2011 @ 4:41 am - August 15, 2011

  10. Love Bachmann. I don’t remember the media pestering Obama about his gay marriage backflips, or other controversial issues. It’s sexism against conservative women again.

    In truth the media is out of step. Incidentally, when given the vote, 31 out of 31 states voted against gay marriage. Even in liberal New York, activists were too chicken to take it to the people.

    Comment by Ben — August 15, 2011 @ 6:26 am - August 15, 2011

  11. Michelle Bachmann wants a constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. This would be the first time one group’s civil liberties would be restricted over another group’s by constitutional amendment.

    Not counting little things like voting and the like.

    Oh, and Tom? You have the same ‘civil liberty’ to have the Federal Government recognize your union to one (1) person of your choice at a time, of the opposite sex, subject to the conditions and restrictions of your state of residence, that everyone else has. How is that restricting your ‘civil liberties’ anymore than mine?

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 15, 2011 @ 9:34 am - August 15, 2011

  12. Mrs.Clinton is supposed to be the first woman POTUS not Backmann.

    Comment by Richard Bell — August 15, 2011 @ 5:53 pm - August 15, 2011

  13. Live… Tom is correct there. There are no amendments that add restrictions to civil liberties… Unless you consider Prohibition a restriction against our civil right to drink!!!! :-)

    Comment by Sonicfrog — August 15, 2011 @ 6:50 pm - August 15, 2011

  14. Touche’ Sonicfrog. Of course a DOMA wouldn’t either.

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 15, 2011 @ 8:25 pm - August 15, 2011

  15. Touche’ Sonicfrog. Of course a DOMA wouldn’t either.

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 15, 2011 @ 8:25 pm - August 15, 2011

  16. Actually now that I think about it (oh for an Edit button) the 26th ammendment does. It changed the restriction for voting from 21 to 18, but still limits it (to anyone under 18).

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 15, 2011 @ 8:26 pm - August 15, 2011

  17. Live./.. One would argue that the 27 expanded the right to vote, so i don’t think that is a good example either.

    PS. Anyone else having problems with gmail today???

    Comment by Sonicfrog — August 15, 2011 @ 9:04 pm - August 15, 2011

  18. Oops… I meant 26th.

    Comment by Sonicfrog — August 15, 2011 @ 9:04 pm - August 15, 2011

  19. *laqugh* looks like we’re both having issues Sonic.

    It may have expanded the right to vote, but at the same time it reaffirmed restrictions on the right to vote.

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 16, 2011 @ 7:41 am - August 16, 2011

  20. In sum, even if Bachmann had the ideal solutions to our country’s fiscal and economic problems, she would still be unacceptable because she does not mouth the politically correct platitudes about how wonderful gays are.

    Comment by V the K — August 16, 2011 @ 7:59 am - August 16, 2011

  21. My 7:59 AM post isn’t a personal opinion, just my take on the temperature of the room.

    Comment by V the K — August 16, 2011 @ 8:04 am - August 16, 2011

  22. Actually, the only two amendments to the Constitution which can be directly violated by an individual are the 13th and 21st.

    And did you know: the only amendment that cannot be proposed is: “No State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”

    Just FYI from your friendly civics prof.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — August 16, 2011 @ 4:59 pm - August 16, 2011

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.