Bachmann: “It’s time to let a woman speak”

posted at 3:45 pm on November 21, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Even a superstar female politician sometimes has to wonder whether her gender hinders her. For the first time, Michele Bachmann has overtly begun to reference her sex as a potential obstacle to press favor and public attention. CNN’s Political Ticker reports:

Michele Bachmann, the only woman running for the Republican presidential nomination, questioned Monday whether sexism was a factor in her treatment at the debates and falling poll numbers.

“Sometimes you wonder about that,” Bachmann said in an interview on NBC’s “Today” with Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb. “I have no way of knowing.”

After the last presidential debate, held in South Carolina on Nov. 12 and co-sponsored by CBS and National Journal, Bachmann cried media bias and blasted out an email chain that showed CBS News political director John Dickerson expected Bachmann to receive fewer questions than other candidates.

“I don’t know if it’s because I’m a woman. I have no idea. I know they deliberately chose not to do it,” Bachmann said. …

“It’s unusual to have a woman candidate. We’ve never had a woman on the Republican ticket running for president at this level before,” Bachmann said. “So I think it’s time to let a woman speak.”

CBS credibly responded that she received less attention because she’s not polling particularly well at the moment.

These comments might be the most direct Bachmann has yet uttered about the fact that’s she’s a female — but they hardly mark the first time she’s made a point to emphasize her personal traits alongside her ideas. In fact, so far, my biggest beef against Bachmann has been her seemingly incessant need to prop herself up as a person.

As far back as the New Hampshire debate, when she “rocked” the stage, she mentioned her remarkable foster-mother feats a few more times than was comfortable. Ever since she won the Ames, Iowa, straw poll, she’s repeatedly reminded voters she was the first woman to win it. Most recently, she made the preposterous claim that she has made no gaffes. Not one of her missteps was so memorable as that proclamation of perfection. Why the need to say it and revive the memory of her previous misspoken remarks?

Perhaps we could conclude that Bachmann, like any of the candidates (and any of us!), has her share of insecurities and seeks to reassure herself by quicklisting her accomplishments at every turn. Perhaps we could conclude that Bachmann’s professional accomplishments are not particularly suited to serve as impressive credentials for a presidential bid (back to that “lack of record” bit again). But perhaps we could also conclude that, somewhere along the way, Bachmann subconsciously picked up her self-promotion gambit as a way of attempting to compete with men.

According to Drs. Les and Leslie Parrott, “research and experience consistently point to a fundamental and powerful distinction between the sexes: Men focus on achievement, women focus on relationships.” If Bachmann is like many women, she probably naturally veers toward relationship-building. That’s a valuable skill — in campaigning and politics, too — but it’s not necessarily appreciated in and of itself in politics. That is, in politics, relationship-building is a means to an end (usually a means to a vote). It’s not the end, as it is for many women. So maybe Bachmann learned to tout achievement because she saw it was what was most highly valued in the political world, still a man’s world despite the increasing number of female legislators and executives at the local, state and national levels.

But what’s funny about it is that spoken self-promotion — “It’s time to let a woman speak” — is still an arguably relational approach to achievement. In other words, it’s still not achievement itself.

Bachmann’s best bet would be to drop the self-promotion that doesn’t substitute for meaningful experience and accomplishment and either (a) admit she lacks executive experience but outline clearly what specific steps she has taken to prepare herself to assume executive power or (b) enter a different race at some point that would enable her to acquire the experience she lacks and run for president again sometime in the future.

Given her lack of traction at this point, (a) probably wouldn’t do her much good. But because I think she’s right on almost all the issues, I sincerely hope she’ll consider (b). I’d hate to see a premature presidential bid end her time on the national stage.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

“It’s my turn.”

Signed,

Michelle Bachmann

fossten on November 21, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Everyone s/b allowed to speak.

———-
It’s time for Romney to get nervous.

Schadenfreude on November 21, 2011 at 3:50 PM

Of course, she did want Palin to speak or run, so that’s why she decided to run, even though she knew it would flop

ConservativePartyNow on November 21, 2011 at 3:51 PM

Now go wash those dishes.

I’M KIDDING!!!!!

;>)

hillbillyjim on November 21, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Would have had more impact if she’d said “It’s time to let someone who doesn’t think farts and the Three Stooges are funny speak.”

radjah shelduck on November 21, 2011 at 3:52 PM

It’s time for Romney to get nervous.

Schadenfreude on November 21, 2011 at 3:50 PM

But whereas the early Rick Perry​ surge didn’t distract Romney from his set strategy, and the former Massachusetts governor barely even acknowledged Herman Cain​’s presence at the top of the polls last month, Romney has now made his first truly discernable and consequential course change of the election season:

That would be because neither Perry or Cain are terribly serious candidates. Gingrich is, which makes all the difference.

sharrukin on November 21, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Would have had more impact if she’d said “It’s time to let someone who doesn’t think farts and the Three Stooges are funny speak.”

radjah shelduck on November 21, 2011 at 3:52 PM

But, but, but —-

Farts and the Three Stooges ARE funny…

hillbillyjim on November 21, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Yes, play the victim and PC cards. That will win me over every time.

A second look at Gardasil?

NotCoach on November 21, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Crazy Eyes getting lonely?

mythicknight on November 21, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Michelle Bachmann was a guest on Glenn Beck’s radio show this morning, and certainly sounded quite reasonable and well informed. But then again, so did Rick Santorum a few days ago. Either would surely be a huge improvement over 0bama, but I think neither is likely to have the opportunity to show it.

bofh on November 21, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Would have had more impact if she’d said “It’s time to let someone who doesn’t think farts and the Three Stooges are funny speak.”

radjah shelduck on November 21, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Anyone running on an anti-fart and 3 Stooges ballot has lost my vote forever.

DrAllecon on November 21, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Yes, play the victim and PC cards. That will win me over every time.

A second look at Gardasil?

NotCoach on November 21, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Its been that kind of campaign. Cain played the race card like it was going out of style, and Perry pulled the same tricj with his last name comment and then went for the ‘cancer victim’ and ‘heartless’ sympathy cards. Bachmann also played the ‘Its for the children’ sympathy card.

sharrukin on November 21, 2011 at 3:59 PM

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, ELVIS !

stenwin77 on November 21, 2011 at 3:59 PM

“I don’t have a Pen1s, so listen to me!!!!”

-Michelle Bachmann

portlandon on November 21, 2011 at 4:01 PM

The plan is to raise her profile, stomp any DFLer who runs next November and then, in 2014, the big prize:

Al Franken’s Senate seat.

Bruno Strozek on November 21, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Michele, watch out for the dorsal fin on your way down…

JohnGalt23 on November 21, 2011 at 4:02 PM

CBS credibly responded that she received less attention because she’s not polling particularly well at the moment.

That’s not at all credible, Tina, Jeb Huntsman polls lower yet received far more time, so it seemed to me.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 4:03 PM

DrAllecon on November 21, 2011 at 3:57 PM

“Oh, a wise guy.”

hillbillyjim on November 21, 2011 at 4:03 PM

That’s not at all credible, Tina, Jeb Huntsman polls lower yet received far more time, so it seemed to me.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 4:03 PM

True, true, and more true.

SouthernGent on November 21, 2011 at 4:06 PM

CBS credibly responded that she received less attention because she’s not polling particularly well at the moment.

Ron Paul polled pretty well and received less than 90 seconds, which pretty much proves they weren’t proportioning time relative to stature in the polls.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 4:07 PM

She hasn’t disappeared because she wasn’t allowed to speak. She disappeared because of what she says when she speaks.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Michele Huntsman… 2012!

Seven Percent Solution on November 21, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Cain played the race card …

Bachman plays the gender card …

Yawn and …

Yawn.

It’s so damned disconcerting to watch conservatives play to the same memes that liberals do.

Sarah Palin never had a problem with getting attention from the press. There’s a rumor out there, that she’s a … woman. I don’t know, she looks like a woman to me … she has five kids … though Andrew Sullivan says one isn’t hers, so potentially there could be some cover-up here I suppose? (/s)

Herman Cain tanks in the polls … “Oh, it’s because I’m black and everyone is a lynching racist.”

Bachmann tanks in the polls … “Oh, it’s because I’m a woman and everyone is a chauvinist”

No … it has nothing to do with physical characteristics … this is all about the fact that you’re STUPID ya doofuses! Not serious candidates.

HondaV65 on November 21, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Get a blimp..:)

Dire Straits on November 21, 2011 at 4:12 PM

If I’m not paying close enough attention to Bachmann, it’s because my last vaccination made me insane.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Michele Huntsman… 2012!

Seven Percent Solution on November 21, 2011 at 4:10 PM

I half expect Monica Huntsman to be the next one to play the gender victim card.

NotCoach on November 21, 2011 at 4:15 PM

The only thing I want to here out of Bachmann’s mouth is “I’m throwing in the towel”

Sorry, but the woman has a few screws loose.

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Come now, Michele. Conservatives tend to be more concerned with what’s between the ears than what’s between the legs. Liberals, on the other hand…

Red Cloud on November 21, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Why did people humor her so long?

SarahW on November 21, 2011 at 4:15 PM

If I’m not paying close enough attention to Bachmann, it’s because my last vaccination made me insane.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2011 at 4:13 PM

No, it made you retarded. And you don’t even know that because you’re retarded now.

NotCoach on November 21, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Michele should go back to attacking Obowma and his failed policies…

… Wondering if sexism is a factor in her treatment at the debates and falling poll numbers sounds like a topic for ‘The View’.

(shutters)

Seven Percent Solution on November 21, 2011 at 4:16 PM

She hasn’t disappeared because she wasn’t allowed to speak. She disappeared because of what she says when she speaks.

hawksruleva on November 21, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Actually, if you watched the See BS debate (which apparently you didn’t), Bachmann did quite well with the time she was given and didn’t sho up dressed like Captain Steubbing that night.

bw222 on November 21, 2011 at 4:17 PM

But what’s funny about it is that spoken self-promotion — “It’s time to let a woman speak” — is still an arguably relational approach to achievement. In other words, it’s still not achievement itself.

Good point. If you’re running for President, you shouldn’t be saying,”Let me, let me! Why won’t you let me??!!” You should show leadership and keep your mouth shut even when things aren’t fair. Many times things aren’t fair–for everyone.

Being POTUS is not for the fainthearted or complainers–we’ve had enough whining from the person in the WH.

INC on November 21, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I’d hate to see a premature presidential bid end her time on the national stage.

She went “full retard” months ago.

Pablo Honey on November 21, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Michele Bachmann has a lot to offer, and her service in the House and her adoption of so many children are exemplary. Her main problem in seeking the Presidency is not the fact that she’s a woman, but the fact her House experience is relatively short (nearly 5 years), and she did not assume any leadership positions in the House. She probably should have waited until 2016 or 2020 to seek the Presidency, possibly trying to raise her national stature by running for the Senate.

While Newt Gingrich’s experience is also limited to the House, he has far more experience than Bachmann, and as Speaker had to negotiate policy with a President of the opposite party (Clinton), so he is probably much more familiar with the role of a President in working with Congress to get things done. If Gingrich is elected President, he will probably have a friendly House, and possibly a Republican majority in the Senate which will NOT be filibuster-proof. Gingrich’s negotiating skills as former Speaker will probably be very useful in persuading a few Senate Democrats to break filibusters.

Steve Z on November 21, 2011 at 4:20 PM

Bachmann: “It’s time to let a woman speak”

As soon as one shows up, we’ll show her to the mic.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 21, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Sarah Palin never had a problem with getting attention from the press. There’s a rumor out there, that she’s a … woman. I don’t know, she looks like a woman to me … she has five kids … though Andrew Sullivan says one isn’t hers, so potentially there could be some cover-up here I suppose? (/s)

HondaV65 on November 21, 2011 at 4:11 PM

What you say about Palin is true, but there are plenty of haters – including here at HA – that always accused Palin of whining when she fought back against the media.

bw222 on November 21, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Remember that maudlin doo dah she tried in one of the debates regarding mortgages under water? She went on and on about how women were the main victims, and speaking to the camera, she told all single mothers with kids who were in danger of losing their homes not to worry because she alone would fight for their right to stay housed. Obvious and pitiful.

a capella on November 21, 2011 at 4:22 PM

The plan is to raise her profile, stomp any DFLer who runs next November and then, in 2014, the big prize:

Al Franken’s Senate seat.

Bruno Strozek on November 21, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Worth repeating.

onlineanalyst on November 21, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Now go wash those dishes.

I’M KIDDING!!!!!

;>)

hillbillyjim on November 21, 2011 at 3:52 PM

I don’t believe you. Put Mrs. hillbillyjim on the line and we’ll ask her.

platypus on November 21, 2011 at 4:26 PM

We let her speak … and then she said really stupid stuff about vaccinations.

It’s time for Bachmann to muzzle. STFU. Go sit in the corner and iron my shirts.

moochy on November 21, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Didn’t Libby dole briefly run for president? If my memory is correct, Michele is not the first republican female to run for president.

karenhasfreedom on November 21, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Anderson? Anderson!? Anderson! Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!
Anderson? Anderson!? Anderson! Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!
Anderson? Anderson!? Anderson! Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!
Anderson? Anderson!? Anderson! Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!
Anderson? Anderson!? Anderson! Anderson! Anderson! Anderson!
…the good news is– the cake is baked
.

 

It’s not simply that she is a woman. It’s that she is a crazy-eyed borderline psychotic woman. There’s a huge difference.

FlatFoot on November 21, 2011 at 4:37 PM

It’s not simply that she is a woman. It’s that she is a crazy-eyed borderline psychotic woman. There’s a huge difference.

FlatFoot on November 21, 2011 at 4:37 PM

The deranged hatred of Bachmann is similar to what Sarah Palin had to undergo. Maybe she was right not to run, Republican’s just aren’t ready for a woman yet. Or maybe it’s the establishment that don’t want Palin or Bachmann because they’re both reformers and would help us throw the bums out.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 4:42 PM

hillbillyjim on November 21, 2011 at 4:03 PM

“Are you giving me the double-talk?”

“Do you swear…”
“No, but I know all the words.”

I can’t get youtube at work, but a fan like yourself wouldn’t need it.

Howard/Fine/Howard ’12!

DrAllecon on November 21, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Bachmann: “It’s time to let a woman speak”

You’ve come a long way, baby. Hey, the good old days had their merits: -(Boxer) -(Pelosi) -(Feinstein) -(The_View) -(Oprah)…

Madame Curie was great, but she was the real deal.

Feedie on November 21, 2011 at 4:50 PM

For the first time, Michele Bachmann has overtly begun to reference her sex as a potential obstacle to press favor and public attention.

And here I thought that had more to do with the “too cool for you” attitude she showed earlier in Iowa and her loopy statements about Gardasil. Silly me.

irishspy on November 21, 2011 at 5:10 PM

DrAllecon on November 21, 2011 at 3:57 PM

NOBODY . . . out-farts ME . . . not Homer, not Peter, not Michael Moore, . . . NOBODY!

But I don’t have any problem supporting her.

listens2glenn on November 21, 2011 at 5:12 PM

It’s that she is a crazy-eyed borderline psychotic woman.
FlatFoot on November 21, 2011 at 4:37 PM

What qualifies her as such?

listens2glenn on November 21, 2011 at 5:14 PM

Barf.

I have no problem supporting a female candidate, just like I have no problem supporting a black candidate. But always nagging in the back of my mind is the worry that sooner or later, they’ll pull out the gender/race card.

I won’t pretend I was ever a Bachmann supporter. But if I was, I wouldn’t be now.

Splashman on November 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

I would like to support her, but I had so many vaccinations that I can’t understand a thing she’s saying.

ronsfi on November 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM

The deranged hatred of Bachmann is similar to what Sarah Palin had to undergo.

Get real- I’d vote for Sarah in a heatbeat but the reality is the media has so bruised Sarah’s reputation the average voter doesn’t know fact from fiction.

Bachmann on the other hand, the stupid is strong in this one.

She is going to beat the hell out of Perry for vaccinations when she herself has taken a nice chunk of cash from suppliers of such vaccines and had nothing to say about the mandatory vaccinations in her own state!

And please don’t make me bring up the Cain 999/666 reference she blurted out. What are we in grade school?

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Bachmann on the other hand, the stupid is strong in this one.

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM

That’s just totally baseless BS.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

That’s just totally baseless BS.

I just gave two examples that can be confirmed with ease, are you trying to say it didn’t happen?

Go for it sport.

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

An American Thatcher would take the White House in a heartbeat. Leftist heads spinning with pea soup is pure bonus next to the agenda of such a woman.

I don’t believe the smear machines could’ve stopped Palin, but she has a young child to raise. I wasn’t a Palinista, but had high hopes for her. Even so, something never felt quite right about it. I don’t like the way she quit, but she was being true to the values she embodied by putting family first. Had she been in a slightly later phase of life…

Feedie on November 21, 2011 at 5:41 PM

What are we in grade school?

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Perhaps you are, I’m not sure.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 5:43 PM

Bachmann’s problems are not the fault of anyone else. She is not qualified to be President, period.

She has none of the experience that is needed. And adding to that her performance during this campaign is what brought her poll numbers down. Being the attack dog for Romney by attacking Gov. Perry, her various gaffes, her constant self promotion (based on?), her choice of Rollins, etc, these are her doings.

Any woman running for the nomination of President needs Experience, intelligence, judgement, integrity in both Domestic and Foreign Policy.

One needs more than a desire to be President, one must be able to demonstrate they are capable. I don’t find this to be true of Bachmann.

bluefox on November 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

The deranged hatred of Bachmann is similar to what Sarah Palin had to undergo. Maybe she was right not to run, Republican’s just aren’t ready for a woman yet. Or maybe it’s the establishment that don’t want Palin or Bachmann because they’re both reformers and would help us throw the bums out.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Sorry, but there’s no comparison. Heck, Bachmann was even a media darling until Perry got into the race — when the assumption was that Bachmann was hurting the chances of a potential Palin candidacy.

ddrintn on November 21, 2011 at 5:54 PM

Perhaps you are, I’m not sure.

Floatingrock has yet to refute the facts I have pointed out.

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 5:55 PM

time to let a woman speak…

Gosh, Michelle, you didn’t think that way when you hired Ed Rollins to get rid of your female competition -taking down Sarah Palin like that makes you a hypocrite in my book. Stick with attacking Obama and stop whining.

Don L on November 21, 2011 at 5:56 PM

Speaking as another broad…I think MB needs to quit being a whiny victim.
Way to play into those stereotypes Michele!
*sigh*

annoyinglittletwerp on November 21, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I want Maw Maw Grizzly..:)

Dire Straits on November 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

Bachmann is the best candidate with the least negatives yet is treated like absolute dirt. There’s no justification for it. Bachmann’s negatives are objectively much tamer than any of the other candidates, who support unconstitutional mandates and pander to illegal aliens and TARP and so forth. So the fact that her negatives are relatively slight, the vile propaganda that people, like many here, spew against her is clearly deranged.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on November 21, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Hello alt..:)

Dire Straits on November 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

bluefox on November 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

I said before that while I’m not a fan of SP or MB=given a choice…Palin was the better candidate.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Seriously FloatingRock- The last time I ever heard someone state “if you turn X upside down it equals Y” was 7th grade back in the 70′s.

You know when pocket caluculators first came out and you could spell “BOOBIES” upsdide down.

The woman has done good things, but has turned into a gaffe machine that would do ‘ol Joe Biden proud.

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 6:02 PM

Seriously FloatingRock- The last time I ever heard someone state “if you turn X upside down it equals Y” was 7th grade back in the 70′s.

And I assume you’re going to pretend she was serious in order to justify your irrational hatred….

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 6:07 PM

bluefox on November 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

I said before that while I’m not a fan of SP or MB=given a choice…Palin was the better candidate.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Hi there alt:-) I agree; between Bachmann and Palin, it’s a no brainer, LOL

bluefox on November 21, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Bachmann is the best candidate with the least negatives yet is treated like absolute dirt. There’s no justification for it. Bachmann’s negatives are objectively much tamer than any of the other candidates, who support unconstitutional mandates and pander to illegal aliens and TARP and so forth. So the fact that her negatives are relatively slight, the vile propaganda that people, like many here, spew against her is clearly deranged.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

What experience does she have over and above the other Candidates that cause you to believe that she is the “best” Candidate? I have found none after researching.

bluefox on November 21, 2011 at 6:14 PM

Bachmann is the best candidate with the least negatives yet is treated like absolute dirt. There’s no justification for it.

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

Objectively, no there isn’t, but then again as I said for a while there Bachmann was the bee’s knees as far as media coverage was concerned.

ddrintn on November 21, 2011 at 6:17 PM

And I assume you’re going to pretend she was serious in order to justify your irrational hatred….

FloatingRock on November 21, 2011 at 6:07 PM

1) You have yet to refute what I stated about her.

2) Oh? I never stated I hated her, you projecting something there pal?

I stated she needs to throw in the towel, she acted stupidly which I’m sure the media will plaster wall to wall come the 2012 elections. She does nothing but make the GOP look bad which we don’t need.

You don’t blurt out something like 999/666 during a serious debate, it was stupid.

gdonovan on November 21, 2011 at 6:43 PM

I’ll listen to ya after ya make me a sammich.

fossten on November 21, 2011 at 8:00 PM

I want Maw Maw Grizzly..:)

Dire Straits on November 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

(Sigh) . . . . . . . Yeah, I know. You and me, both.

And a whole lot of other people here.

listens2glenn on November 21, 2011 at 10:29 PM

1) You have yet to refute what I stated about her.

I did refute it. It was a joke and you should work on your sense of humor. I thought it was funny.

FloatingRock on November 22, 2011 at 12:13 AM

And her reasoning was sound; creating a new federal sales tax was a awful idea.

FloatingRock on November 22, 2011 at 12:16 AM

It’s not getting a woman to speak that’s the problem….its getting them to SHUT UP that’s the trick! LOL!

OK, THAT WAS A JOKE – JUST A JOKE! NO OFFENSE MEANT!!!!

easyt65 on November 22, 2011 at 7:58 AM

GLENN BECK JUST ENDORSED MICHELLE BACHMAN.

Further bulletins as events warrant.

listens2glenn on November 22, 2011 at 10:48 AM

listens2glenn on November 22, 2011 at 10:48 AM

I just heard that! Beck jumped the shark, LOL I guess accomplishments and experience doesn’t matter, just talk a good talk. Last week it was Santorum was the next George Washington, according to Beck.

Beck is moving to Texas; wonder what Gov. Perry thinks about this, LOL

bluefox on November 22, 2011 at 12:04 PM

If you had just for once shut up, went back in the kitchen and made your old man some pie, maybe you could have cured his poofterness.

borntoraisehogs on November 22, 2011 at 12:34 PM