In all the attention on Palin — will she or won’t she run for Presidency — I think we have a tendency to overlook (or simply laugh at — too easy to do) another declared candidate who is just possibly crazier than Palin. Michele Bachmann’s Holy War
Bachmann is a religious zealot whose brain is a raging electrical storm of divine visions and paranoid delusions. She believes that the Chinese are plotting to replace the dollar bill, that light bulbs are killing our dogs and cats, and that God personally chose her to become both an IRS attorney who would spend years hounding taxpayers and a raging anti-tax Tea Party crusader against big government. She kicked off her unofficial presidential campaign in New Hampshire, by mistakenly declaring it the birthplace of the American Revolution. “It’s your state that fired the shot that was heard around the world!” she gushed. “You are the state of Lexington and Concord, you started the battle for liberty right here in your backyard.”
It’s easy enough to dismiss her on the basis of how often she gets things wrong (just like Palin, actually). But in reading through the Rolling Stones article, it’s even worse:
Bachmann claimed that back in her college days, she was up one night praying with a female friend of hers when “the Lord gave each one of us the same, exact vision… It was a picture of me, marrying this man, in the valley where his parents have a farm in western Wisconsin.” Meanwhile, miles away, Marcus “was repairing a fence on the farm where he worked, and the Lord showed him in a vision that he was supposed to marry me.” According to Bachmann, Marcus initially complained to God that he wanted to see the world first, and only later relented.
Bachmann takes her role as a God-fearing submissive wife quite literally:
When Bachmann finished her studies in Oklahoma, Marcus instructed her to do her postgraduate work in tax law — a command Michele took as divinely ordained. She would later profess to complete surprise at God’s choice for her field of study. “Tax law? I hate taxes,” she said. “Why should I go and do something like that?” Still, she sucked it up and did as she was told. “The Lord says: Be submissive, wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.”
Really? Do we really want a President who will sit down and do whatever their spouse tells them to dom because they think it is the God-given way to run a household? Talk about a nightmare of entangling religion and state.
Given how Bachmann’s stature rises every time she does something we laugh at, it’s no wonder she’s set her strangely unfocused eyes on the White House. Since arriving in Congress, she has been a human tabloid-copy machine, spouting one copy-worthy lunacy after another. She launched a fierce campaign against compact fluorescent lights, claiming that the energy-saving bulbs contain mercury and pose a “very real threat to children, disabled people, pets, senior citizens.” She blasted the 2010 census as a government plot and told people not to comply because the U.S. Constitution doesn’t require citizens to participate, when in fact it does. She told her constituents to be “armed and dangerous” in their resistance to cap-and-trade limits on climate-warming pollution. She insisted that Obama’s trip to India cost taxpayers $200 million a day, and claimed that Nancy Pelosi had spent $100,000 on booze on state-paid flights aboard military jets.
This is not to say that Bachmann hasn’t played a prominent role in Congress. Most significantly, she cannily positioned herself as the congressional champion of the Tea Party; last summer she formed a Tea Party caucus, which she now leads. The public has become acquainted with some of Bachmann’s other excellent qualities as a politician — her TV-ready looks, her easy confidence in public speaking, her quick command of a mountainous database of (frequently bogus) facts — but often overlooked is her greatest quality, the gigantic set of burnished titanium Terminator-testicles swinging under her skirt.
So anyway. I think we need to keep an eye on her. And look for her to hang herself. I think a good start would be to explicitly ask her, in a press conference of some type, as to whether she would, even as President, obey every command her husband gave her.