Michele Bachmann shattering stereotypes of conservative women

BRETT FLASHNICK AP Republican presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., answers questions from the media after signing the Cut Cap … Continued



Republican presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., answers questions from the media after signing the Cut Cap Balance Pledge during a news conference in Columbia, S.C., Monday, July 18, 2011.

Minnesota Congresswoman and Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is destroying the left’s definition of feminism. The modern feminist movement’s evolution into nothing more than liberal activist organizations is being exposed by the lack of enthusiasm for Bachmann’s success. As Post blogger Jennifer Rubin recently noted, the congresswoman “may be the first GOP woman to ever win a caucus or a primary.” It is not shocking that Democrat-leaning, mostly pro-abortion rights “feminist” leaders do not agree with Bachmann’s political philosophy. Yet, why are liberal feminists not in the least bit satisfied that a woman can be a serious contender in the Republican presidential race?

It is simple. Bachmann 2012 hurts their cause. Attorneys know that bad facts make bad law. Factually, Bachmann is highly educated former tax attorney, a successful politician, and tough as nails (she says she has a “titanium spine” ). But, she also happens to be an ardently pro-life, evangelical, conservative, tea party-leaning, mother of five (foster mom to 23) who demonstrates that you can be a successful woman in politics without being a moderate or a liberal.

Democrat Congressman Keith Ellison gave a speech this month to a liberal student organization and had the audacity to claim that, “These same people who want to shrink government until you can drown it in a bathtub also want mom to get back in the kitchen and take her shoes off and get pregnant. They’re offended by strong, powerful women. Here’s the sad part: some of them are women themselves – Michele Bachmann could be an example.”

Maybe Mr. Ellison should spend more time lecturing his fellow Muslims about women’s rights and give up the partisan attack on a “strong, powerful” woman. Honestly, this kind of rhetoric is helping conservatives. Plenty of women see motherhood as a full-time job and are proud about taking an active role in their children’s development. Furthermore, motherhood is no longer a barrier to a career, as evidenced by Bachmann.

Today, evangelical women are toggling between modern and traditional gender roles. Bachmann is proof that you can blend both without sacrificing one or the other.

To make matters worse for the liberal feminist groups, Bachmann is not trying to make her campaign into a referendum on women’s liberation.

As her spokesman recently told the Washington Post, “Congresswoman Bachmann doesn’t make it about gender or herself. The election is about the need for a constitutional conservative in the White House. The best candidate happens to be a woman.”

Two of the most prominent conservatives in America happen to be evangelical woman and that seriously irks the “nation’s largest feminist organization,” the National Organization for Women, because they have to choose when to defend these women from gender-based character assaults. Many of these groups buy into the narrative that Bachmann and Palin are an identical phenomenon, a view that is degrading to all women.

Bachmann is ruffling the feathers of the old guard of the religious right, too, but in a very different way. Although some national social conservative leaders may not be as comfortable with a President Bachmann as they are with a President Perry, they will defend her from the vicious attacks on her faith, ideology, and competency to lead. She, like Governor Perry, is one of us and her success is a direct reflection of our ability to continue growing as a movement.

Congresswoman Bachmann is shattering stereotypes and that is a good thing for the religious right as we continue reaching out to younger Americans and exposing liberal hypocrisy.

  • TopTurtle

    What’s the point here? Should feminists be happy that Michelle Bachmann might win the Republican nomination simply because she’s a woman? Of course not. She’s against almost all of the things liberal feminists fight for. Should they be slightly happier because she’s a woman rather than a man with the same views? Who cares?

    She’s a theocrat. Enough said.

  • owlk

    Possibly the stupidest article I’ve read in awhile. Turns out, democrats don’t support folks due to their race, religion, or clothing styles, but rather, no THEIR ABILITY TO REASON. Why aren’t “feminists” enthused by Bachmann’s success? For the same reason we would not be happy with the success of Madam La Farge, yeah, she’s a woman, but, she’s also WRONG. The idea that “feminists” ought to support ANY successful woman is about as intelligent as comment as claiming that if someone identifies themselves as a christian, we should take it on face value and not do any more questioning, and vote for them no matter what they say. Pure idiocy.

  • owlk

    Feminism is the philosophy that woman are equal to men, and deserve to be treated the same way as men. It has NOTHING to do with which gender you are.

  • owlk

    Finally, why would a feminist be interested in a female candidate that…”To make matters worse for the liberal feminist groups, Bachmann is not trying to make her campaign into a referendum on women’s liberation.” So, she isn’t concerned with women’s rights, even though less then 100 years ago, she wasn’t allowed to vote. Up until 1960, women could not own property in a marriage. Guess who opposed changing that law?

  • dollmike

    She IS the stereotype of a conservative woman.

  • mattroznowski

    Jordan – Congresswoman Bachmann voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, therefore she wants women to be paid less than men for equal work. Too bad you left this important fact out of your article…

  • apollonhymn

    I will admit, it is a shame that the GOP cannot seem to rally behind a single strong, rational female candidate. In all political reality Bachmann cannot take a majority in a national election. Her current campaign will either end in a gradual washout, or in utter failure on a national stage, and a general movement toward a viable female candidate for our top political office deserves to be taken more seriously than that.

  • paulmdoro

    It is amusing to see right-wing Bachmann myths repeated here. Allegedly she has a titanium spine, but she has called the police about petty nonsense repeatedly. She screamed when two women tried talking to her in a bathroom (the police laughed off her claims) and hid in the bushes at a gay rights gathering. She rails against the government but used to go after people for the IRS and gladly accepts government checks (family farm, husband’s practice). She claims to be Christian but preaches hatred and utilizes hate speech constantly, just like most conservative “Christians.” And Sekulow claims others are engaging in hypocrisy. Pot, meet kettle.

  • YEAL9

    Not your “stereotyped” conservative but still not electable. Why?

    Once again, all the conservative votes in the country “ain’t” going to help a “pro-life” presidential candidate, i.e Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Herman Cain, Ron Paul or Rick Santorum, in 2012 as the “Immoral Majority” rules the country and will be doing so for awhile.

    The “Immoral Majority” you ask?

    The fastest growing USA voting bloc: In 2008, the 70+ million “Roe vs. Wade mothers and fathers” of aborted womb-babies” whose ranks grow by two million per year i.e. 78+ million “IM” voters in 2012.

    2008 Presidential popular vote results:

    69,456,897 for pro-abortion BO, 59,934,814 for “pro-life” JM.

    And all because many women fail to take the Pill once a day or men fail to use a condom even though in most cases these men have them in their pockets. (maybe it should be called the “Stupid Majority”?)

    (The failures of the widely used birth “control” methods i.e. the Pill and male condom have led to the large rate of abortions ( one million/yr) and STDs (19 million/yr) in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or condoms properly and/or use other safer birth control methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and STDs.)

  • JimTrott

    I think it’s great that Ms Bachmann is doing so well. I want Americans to know all about her and those who influence her. If she were to win the nomination (which she most certainly won’t) then the Dominionist/Reconstructionist factions of the Religious Right will come under closer scrutiny.

    Jordon, you, your father, and your boss Pat Robertson are dangerous for America. I urge everyone to listen to JaySekulowLive to see the disingenuous rhetoric that goes on there, presented in a pressured almost-manic urgency.

    Always in attendance is fear-mongering and the notion of displeasing God, You are hardly a shining light for Christ, Jordon.

  • katiedid19621

    Jordan Sekulow apparently doesn’t believe that Michelle Bachmann’s ranting about how homosexuals are degenerates or all of Michelle Bachmann’s misstatements of facts (and her ardent insistence of how right her misinformation is) or the fact that she offhandedly signs pledges which support a rosy revisionist history of slavery could possibly be the reason why “feminists” (or any other right-thinking person, regardless of gender, political affiliation, color, creed, etc.) cannot support her. The woman is a walking disaster. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the American Red Cross served donuts to her bedside every morning.

  • katiedid19621

    If only the GOP could find a single strong, rational female candidate. … All they seem to come up with are people like Palin and Bachmann, who don’t exactly come across as knowledgeable, and who act like crybabies when someone calls them out on some horrendous statement they make.

  • dianaruck

    Conservative Americans and Evangelical Christians were especially quiet for many years. Some have mistakenly taken that to mean that they were a small group that was dying out. When the attacks on our liberties became blatant and constant the group started to come together and speak out in recent years. America is still a predominantly conservative nation who wants peace and tolerance for all. The problem is that many people have warped the definition of tolerance to mean that we must not only tolerate opposing views, but we must embrace or endorse them as though we believe they are equally valid. To tolerate simply means “to put up with”. Liberals simply don’t like the fact that Michelle Bachmann, while tolerating others’ views, does not feel the need to apologize for or compromise on her own. She simply says where she stands without throwing a political bone to every group in an effort to make everyone like her at least a little bit. She doesn’t just want votes, she wants to know she is the people’s representative. She is who she is…support her or don’t, but at least you know who you are supporting or rejecting. Liberals find it troubling that she does in fact speak for so many people, and she is more concerned with doing what she thinks is right than with appeasing them.

  • Secular1

    “When the attacks on our liberties became blatant and constant the group started to come together and speak out in recent years.” I wonder what liberties of your have been under constant attack? I as far as I can see only your rights to treat blacks as chattel have been obliterated and your attempts to destroy gays and lesbians have been eroded. None of these have taken away any of your rights only have recognized others rights and the nation had said that enough is enough let them be. You claim you want only tolerate the opposing views. But the fact of the matter is that you do not want teh LGBT to have the same righjts as you do. If your wife had divorced you, it is not because she suddenly relized she had the hots for your neighbor’s wife or any thing, she dumped you because you were a jerk. She did not do that because it is now lega for her to marry another woman.

  • Non-RuralSouthernWhite

    ur an idiot