Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ann Archy

It was a stupid question he was trying to ask. If he’s worried about someone’s “head” he should ask obama about that scar. Or he could ask obama if he’s putting second hand smoke in the oval office.


61 posted on 07/19/2011 8:45:27 PM PDT by Terry Mross (I'll only vote for a SECOND party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: Terry Mross
It was a stupid question he was trying to ask.

As I understand it, the question was whether or not her medical condition had caused her to miss House votes.

Since the issue is whether or not, as reported, her medical condition has "incapacitated her for days", it is a very legitimate question for somebody wanting to be Commander-in-Chief.

When liberals want to divert attention by saying, "It was a stupid question he was trying to ask." .......

Conservatives usually mock them by saying, "Move along folks. Nothing to see here. Move along and don't ask any questions."

Running away from a legitimate question that the public is very curious about only satisfies a candidate's own fans. Unless that candidate already has over 50% support, running away from a legitimate question only makes the majority of the voters think, "That candidate has something to hide. Look at him/her run!"

If he’s worried about someone’s “head” he should ask obama about that scar. Or he could ask obama if he’s putting second hand smoke in the oval office.

So that should be the GOP position?

"Our weak candidate is not as bad as your weak candidate"?

The GOP needs a strong candidate that can actually defeat Obama in 2012 and Michele Bachmann is nothing more than another Christine O'Donnell fiasco in the making.

If you think the migraine questions are tough, wait until the liberal media starts concentrating on the image of Michele Bachmann asking the American voters to elect her Commander-in-Chief, so that she can have her finger on the Nuclear Button, and then have the Obama campaign play a video tape of her saying that she believes that it is her religious duty to God to be "submissive" to Marcus Bachmann when he tells her to do something, even though she does not want to do it.

Michele Bachmann will need to have her Nike running shoes on when the Obama campaign and the liberal media pulls that arrow out of their quiver.

==================

Bachmann:(At 1:25) Tells audience that she did what Marcus Bacmann told her to do, regarding her post graduate education, even though she did not want to, because she says it is her religious duty to be "submissive" to Marcus Bachmann

In this speech at a mega-church in the Minneapolis area back in 2006, Michele Bachmann explained her decision to pursue tax law wasn't her choice. Her husband, Marcus told her "to go and get a post-doctorate degree in tax law." This was not what Michele wanted. ("Tax law? I hate taxes!"), but she was believed that God was speaking through her husband. "Why should I go and do something like that? But the Lord says, 'Be submissive wives; you are to be submissive to your husbands.”

==================


Marcus Bachmann: Finger on the Nuclear Button by Submissive Religious Proxy

82 posted on 07/20/2011 10:04:53 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson