Connect with us

The Bachmann Effect: Michele, Her Husband, God, And Anti-Gay Bigotry

Published

on

Michele Bachmann is currently campaigning for the Republican 2012 nomination for President. With her Tea Party views espoused on a regular basis, Bachmann has received vast news attention for being far more right-leaning than the average general election voter would support. Socially, however, Bachmann has left the financially-focused Tea Party political stance and is focused on using her own Christian beliefs to magnetize the same voting base that swept the 2010 elections. The continuously outspoken and often erroneous Congresswoman remains steadfast in holding on to antiquated social values such as the anti-LGBT bigotry regularly expressed by her campaign and now by her husband.

Leader of the family’s “Christian” counseling center, Bachmann and Associates, Marcus Bachmann concentrates on marital and familial issues, beginning with children at the age of five years old. He holds a Master’s Degree in education/counseling from Pat Robertson’s Regents University and a PhD from the formerly bankrupt Union Graduate Institute in Clinical Psychology. During an interview picked up by the mainstream press early last week, Dr. Bachmann discussed his views on the LGBT community. Dr. Bachmann saw no issue in using his “qualifications” as a clinical psychologist and director of a “mental health services clinic” to add an extra weight to his direction on averting or abating homosexuality, going directly against the APA and AMA.

READ: Michele Bachmann’s Top Ten Anti-Gay Quotes

Dr. Bachmann has continued to make numerous statements as to God’s view which he claims his is in direct line with, on the gay community and the level of respect — or lack thereof — such “barbarians,” as he calls homosexuals, deserve. While many outlets have focused on the Bachmann comments regarding the need for Christians to educate the barbarians of our day “gay people”, there is much more within his comments and work that is troubling.

The Bachmann’s have had 23 foster children, in addition to their five children, come and go through their home between 1992 and 2000. All of the foster children have been girls and have needed the psychological support and services being made available due to Dr. Bachmann’s vocational background. Their home was legally labeled a treatment home dealing with short term (from a few months to over a year,) rehabilitations. In the aforementioned interview, he speaks of disciplining gay children. The obvious question is what kind of discipline is he endorsing? Has he ever used “discipline” on any of the foster children? Does he use or teach this discipline at his clinic?

 


“We have to understand: barbarians need to be educated. They need to be disciplined. Just because someone feels it or thinks it doesn’t mean that we are supposed to go down that road. That’s what is called the sinful nature. We have a responsibility as parents and as authority figures not to encourage such thoughts and feelings from moving into the action steps…”

— Marcus Bachmann, 2010


 

Speaking to Point of View Radio Talk Show’s right-leaning Christian audience, Bachmann was talking with an authority backed by God and that of “Doctor” who was trying to help the “sinful” parts of the nation come into one with their Creator. As a former Jehovah’s Witness, I know the power of someone with that respect in and out of the congregation speaking about what “needs to be done.” Christians, especially those in evangelical or fundamentalist denominations, are taught to unquestionably follow these perceived authority figures, like Dr. Bachmann, who are placed in such positions of regard to, among other things, lead the way in teaching those on the outside.

This added layer to Michele Bachmann’s campaign raises a few troubling issues for progressives and the LGBT community, a few frightening nightmares that some aren’t considering.

With her unending rhetoric, staunch stance on social issues, and the now obvious choice to utilize the mental health “expertise” of her fundamentalist Christian husband, the Congresswoman has established an organized, vetted (at least on the surface) force among the Right. On a daily basis this growing a base of supporters is helping to create a far-right conversation on the campaign trail that that is already forcing other Republican primary candidates, as well as President Obama, to answer questions for which they are not prepared — and forcing them to move even farther Right.

READ: Bachmann Called Cops When “Terrorized” By Lesbians Trying To Talk To Her

Mitt Romney, and other “country club” Republicans who would just as soon steer clear of addressing increasingly marginalized, fringe social groups, will have to venture down that road in debates and campaign stops in order to keep the “Bachmann Effect” (yes we are coining the phrase) Tea Party and religious supported attack at bay. What does the Bachmann Effect mean when it comes Election Day?

Many have written off or scoffed at the idea of Michele Bachmann becoming a presidential nominee, let alone assuming the office of the President of the United States. However, ignoring or dismissing what seems like an impossibly crazy idea has time and again proven to be a disastrous eventuality for those refusing to acknowledge the potential of such an outcome. There is a reason that bookies will add the 100 to 1 horse to the betting board — sometimes that horse wins.

The fact is over the last four years no one has really been able to fully estimate the effect of politicians and their message. Republicans seriously underestimated the power of “Yes We Can” and the 2008 Obama for America machine. Democrats and Republicans underestimated the power of the Tea Party movement in the 2010 mid-term election. Now we have pundits and pollsters underestimating the power of a woman, backed by religious leaders, congregants and the Word of God, combined with moral fortitude, and her husband, making headway with a group of voters who have, and will yet again, vote as a bloc for “God’s choice.”

While I, too, cannot see a President Bachmann in our future, the effects of such a campaign further polarizing the right and the left of this country is already being realized and will undoubtedly create consequences for both civil activists and the LGBT equal rights movement in the U.S. We have grown ever closer to full federal equality, with many beginning to see the possibility of a time when organizations like HRC, the Task Force, GLAAD and GetEQUAL will be able to put down their mantles of “fighting for our rights” and pick up a mantle similar to that of the NAACP — one that is vigilant in maintaining our culture and combatting rogue elements, rather than mainstream ones.

We shall see over the coming months the manifestations and eventuality that the “Bachmann Effect” will have on the political scene. There is however, one thing we already know, the religious right has found its spokesperson and she isn’t as easily discredited in the eyes of the Iowa caucus voters as progressives on the coasts would like to believe.

Having been embraced by religious and conservative pundits, media and voters, the Bachmanns form a winning team. We haven’t even seen the full capacity of those who are backing her, or the base that appears to be growing, the average American. What will this team win? Let’s just say I won’t be betting on the 100 to 1 horse in this race.

Growing up in Northern Ontario as a Jehovah’s Witness, Michael Talon experienced firsthand the struggle for equality. Now living in the U.S. with his partner, they work with advocates for federal equality, including immigration. Working side by side, Michael and his partner Brad, head of Luna Media Group, help to deliver messages for equality to the nation.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

NCRM

Stephen Miller Melts Down on Live TV: ‘I Will Be as Excited as I Want to Be!’

Published

on

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller repeatedly had to be asked to “calm down” during a wide-ranging CNN interview on Tuesday that has set the internet on fire.

“This president, for the first time in history, is committed to restoring accountability at every level of the federal government,” Miller declared. “You may assert there’s no waste in the Pentagon. You may assert there is no waste in Treasury. You may assert there’s no waste in HHS.”

CNN’s Brianna Keilar made clear no one is asserting there is no waste.

READ MORE: ‘Ridiculous’: Federal Judge Scorches Trump DOJ Lawyer Over Military ‘Pronoun Use’

“Then why are you not celebrating these cuts if you agree there is waste, if you agree there is abuse, if you agree there is corruption, why are you not celebrating the cuts, the reforms that are being instituted?” Miller, shouting, asked.

“Every day that no action is taken —” Miller, still yelling, continued.

“Stephen, let’s calm down,” Keilar insisted.

“The entire salaries of American workers that are taxed disappear forever —”

“Stephen, let’s calm down,” Keilar again asked. “We’re not having a debate.”

“Well you are clearly trying to debate me,” Miller claimed. “And I will be as excited as I want to be about the fact that we are saving Americans billions of dollars, that we are ending the theft and waste and grift and corruption, that we are stopping American taxpayer dollars from subsidizing a rogue federal bureaucracy that has been relentlessly weaponized against the American people.”

Many have questioned the Trump administration’s assertions.

That exchange led veteran journalist John Harwood to declare, “Stephen Miller is bat— crazy.”

READ MORE: ‘Bloodbath by Design’: Trump’s Russia Negotiators Criticized for ‘Almost No Experience’

In another exchange, Miller condescendingly told Keilar, “The way that Article II” of the Constitution “works is a president wins an election, and then he appoints staff.”

CNN’s Ana Navarro-Cárdenas, a co-host on ABC’s “The View,” responded to a clip of Miller. She wrote: “Insane? Hysterical? Deranged? Off his meds?”

Miller, whose “ideology” is listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “Anti-Immigrant,” is the architect of President Donald Trump’s family separation policies during his first administration. Over one thousand children have yet to be reunited.

“From March 4, 2015, to June 27, 2016, Miller,” the SPLC reported, “sent over 900 emails to Breitbart News editors.”

“Throughout the emails, Miller promotes literature, conspiracy theories, and policies supported by white nationalist and anti-immigrant hate groups,” according to the SPLC.

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Sociopathic’: USAID Worker Sues Alleging State Dept. Medevac Refusal for Pregnant Wife

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Ridiculous’: Federal Judge Scorches Trump DOJ Lawyer Over Military ‘Pronoun Use’

Published

on

A federal judge sharply criticized an attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice over Pentagon policy asserting that the U.S. Armed Forces could somehow be compromised simply by requiring service members to use a colleague’s preferred pronoun.

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, appeared skeptical of both the President’s and the Department of Justice’s stance on transgender service members during Tuesday’s hearing.

Reyes “asserted flatly that the idea that the greatest fighting force in the history of the world would be adversely effected by the need to use specific pronouns for a few thousand members of the military is, ‘Ridiculous,'” Fox News producer Jake Gibson reported.

READ MORE: ‘Bloodbath by Design’: Trump’s Russia Negotiators Criticized for ‘Almost No Experience’

According to Politico’s Kyle Cheney, this is how the exchange went:

“REYES: Can we agree that the greatest fighting force… is not going to be impacted in any way by less than 1 percent of the soldiers using a different pronoun than others might want to call them?

DOJ ATTORNEY: I can’t agree with that here.

REYES: Would you agree with me that if our military is negatively impacted in any kind of way that matters… We all have a lot bigger problems than pronoun use. We have a military that is incompetent. Any common sense rational human being knows that it doesn’t. It is pretext. It is frankly ridiculous. If you want to get me an officer of the U.S. military who is willing to get on the stand and say that because of pronoun usage the U.S. military is less prepared because of pronoun usage. I will be the first to give you a box of cigars.”

An estimated 15,000 service members are transgender.

In another striking exchange, Judge Reyes also called Trump’s executive order on transgender service members “unadulterated animus.”

Currently, the Pentagon has ordered service branches to stop accepting new transgender recruits into the military, and to pause any gender-affirming medical care for transgender troops.

READ MORE: ‘Sociopathic’: USAID Worker Sues Alleging State Dept. Medevac Refusal for Pregnant Wife

“One of the plaintiffs,” in the case, WUSA9‘s Jordan Fischer reports, “Koda Nature, a 23-year-old transgender man from Texas, said he had been working with a recruiter to join the U.S. Marine Corps when he was informed last month he would no longer be able to enlist. Nature said joining the military had been his dream since he was 5 years old – a dream to follow in the footsteps of 17 generations of his family.”

President Donald Trump has signed at least four executive orders restricting the civil rights of transgender people in the United States, including one that could be used to ban open service by transgender troops, under the guise of prioritizing military excellence, readiness, and “unit cohesion” — tropes that for decades were also used to try to prevent lesbian, gay, and bisexual troops from serving openly in America’s armed forces.

“Consistent with the military mission and longstanding DoD policy, expressing a false ‘gender identity’ divergent from an individual’s sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service,” Trump’s January 27 executive order reads. Trump also alleged that “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life. A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”

That order specifically targeted the use of preferred pronouns, which he called, “invented and identification-based pronoun usage.”

“It is the policy of the United States Government to establish high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity. This policy is inconsistent with the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria. This policy is also inconsistent with shifting pronoun usage or use of pronouns that inaccurately reflect an individual’s sex.”

READ MORE: ‘Unconstitutional Threat’: Trump Border Czar Under Fire Over AOC DOJ Request

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

‘Bloodbath by Design’: Trump’s Russia Negotiators Criticized for ‘Almost No Experience’

Published

on

After a week of disastrous messaging by U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, resulting in a 180-degree turn and leaving European leaders and some Americans wondering what U.S. foreign policy is, the Trump administration is once again under fire as critics charge the team he has assembled to start discussions with Russia over its illegal war against Ukraine does not match the “heavyweights” Russia is sending.

The U.S. is already in the hot seat as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy — who has made clear his country will accept no peace deal if they are not part of the negotiations — appears to have been frozen out of the initial talks, which were held Tuesday in Saudi Arabia.

European officials attending the Munich Security Conference last week, “stressed the need for Ukraine to be part of peace talks to end the war. Vice President JD Vance met with Zelenskyy in Munich Friday, telling him the U.S. wants a ‘durable, lasting peace,’ while Zelensky asked for ‘security guarantees,'” CBS News reported.

“Zelenskyy told the conference of world leaders that Ukraine would not accept a deal made ‘behind our backs without our involvement,’ and called for the creation of ‘armed forces of Europe’ amid the possibility of a changing relationship between Europe and the U.S.”

READ MORE: ‘Sociopathic’: USAID Worker Sues Alleging State Dept. Medevac Refusal for Pregnant Wife

Early Tuesday afternoon the Associated Press, calling it “an extraordinary about-face in U.S. foreign policy,” reported: “Russia and US agree to work toward ending Ukraine war in a remarkable diplomatic shift.”

CNN reported that the “United States and Russia agreed on four principles following talks that lasted more than four hours in Saudi Arabia, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Tuesday, including appointing a high-level team to help ‘negotiate and work through the end of the conflict in Ukraine’ in a way that’s ‘acceptable to all the parties engaged.’ Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was not invited to the talks, said Ukraine will not ‘give in to Russia’s ultimatums’ and earlier said he would refuse to sign any agreement negotiated without Kyiv’s involvement.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who reportedly was part of Tuesday’s talks, described them as “useful.”

The talks are expected to continue after this initial meeting. Trump administration officials at the talks in Saudi Arabia included U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.

Foreign policy expert and historian Sławomir Dębski, a former Russia foreign policy analyst, over the weekend described Russia’s team.

He named, “Yury Ushakov, the Kremlin’s chief foreign policy adviser, who has worked in diplomacy for over half a century,” “Sergey Naryshkin, Ushakov’s top spy, who served alongside Putin in the Soviet KGB,” and “Kirill Dmitriev, a financier educated at Stanford and Harvard, who has ties to the Kremlin chief’s family and, according to the publication, could play a key role as an unofficial ‘backchannel’ to Trump’s negotiators.”

“A rumour says that Vladymir Medinsky is to join the Russian team in Riyadh,” Dębski added. “He is a former Minister of Culture. Now he is Putin’s key adviser on ideological aspects of Russian aggression on Ukraine.”

Bloomberg News on Friday reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin “is assembling a heavyweight team with decades of experience in high-stakes negotiations to face off against US President Donald Trump’s representatives for a deal to end Russia’s war in Ukraine.”

“That Putin is opting to rely mostly on highly skilled and experienced negotiators to represent Russia in any talks is hardly a surprise,” Bloomberg added. “The personnel choices underscore just how determined the Russian leader is to secure a favorable outcome in any negotiations and potentially how little his demands in relation to Ukraine have changed in the three years since he ordered the full-scale invasion.”

READ MORE: ‘Unconstitutional Threat’: Trump Border Czar Under Fire Over AOC DOJ Request

Yale University Professor Timothy Snyder, a historian and expert on the Soviet Union and the Holocaust, is the author of the popular bestseller, “On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century.”

Responding to Dębski’s post, Snyder warned: “The American team has almost no experience in high-level international negotiation, no regional expertise on Ukraine and Russia, and no relevant foreign language knowledge. Not true of the Russians, to put it mildly. Looks like a bloodbath by design.”

Brad Bowman, senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, blasted the Trump administration.

“It was a mistake for the Trump administration to negotiate with the Taliban without the Afghan government at the table. It is a mistake to negotiate with Putin without including Kyiv,” he wrote. “When the topic is the future of Ukraine, Kyiv has a right to be at the table, especially in light of the sacrifice and bravery of Ukrainians in defending their homes against Putin’s unprovoked invasion. Putin understands that the United States and Europe are more powerful together. That’s why he wants to divide us. We should not help him.”

READ MORE: Federal Judge ‘Skeptical’ of DOGE: Report

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.