Not sad, tearful, or emotional, as the public would expect from a woman, Bachmann’s final words were exemplary of the strength she has displayed from the day she entered politics, from the day she became the first female Minnesota Congressman.
Yet, her most treasured qualities seemed to have been completely overlooked by the media, especially the day after her withdrawal. David Brooks, in the New York Times, for instance, praises Rick Santorum for his true conservatism, family-based religion, working class status, etc.,–essentially everything Michele Bachmann stood for. The difference? Santorum is Catholic. That’s supposed to be less ‘wacky’ than evangelical protestantism–as found in women like Bachmann and Sarah Palin.
Naturally, Laura Ingraham (Catholic) picked up on the Democrat assessments of Rick Santorum. “Consistency, Conservatism,” etc., are Santorum’s winning traits, she declared this morning (January 5, 2012), as if no such concepts were exemplified by Michele Bachmann.
So it seems that the ever late and trailing media, writers or talkers, have magically come to the transcendent wisdom that everything Michele Bachmann stood for (and stands for) is the wondrous formula for whatever Republican candidate happens to be leading. These traits of truth, consistency, strength, etc., are the cause of their political success, whereas they were completely unrecognized in Michele Bachmann, and, moreover, no one even ventures to comment on why her campaign folded.
As BadEagle.com has stated before, it has to be the simple fact that she is an attractive, soft-spoken woman, of small stature, and has an overtly, obviously loving nature. This simply doesn’t represent the kind of personality the public wants in a national leader. But now, we can also say her evangelical Protestant faith is unacceptable to most Americans. This is how far America has strayed from its psychological roots. There are six Catholics on the Supreme Court. They are regarded as “conservative.” Protestants, in the political realm, are regarded as liberal, or far right wackos–as in the case of those with faith like Bachmann.
The passing of Michele Bachmann, as presidential candidate, is a telling lesson in American sociology. A Christian woman, a white, evangelical Christian woman, is not acceptable in the American public as a national leader. Bachmann was the first female presidential candidate, and probably the best that will ever appear, but the state which Jewish reporter Adrea Mitchell called “too white, too evangelical, too rural” flatly rejected Protestant Michele Bachmann, preferring a male Catholic. This is a profound message, of historical import.
We could ask, Where are the white Protestant males?
Rick Santorum will make a fine president, and it would seem that that his faith would enhance his American values, indeed. (It is important to know that Mitt Romney’s religion will certainly not interfere with his American values.) But the point is, the original American religion, with its social values, is no longer the fundamental value of American society–even in the so-called conservative, Republican Party.
The Tea Party seems out of the picture as well. Despite their grand showing in the 2010 elections, they have been silent and ineffective so far during this 2012 election. They did not support Michele Bachmann, who represented them in Congress. This is a strange fact of history as well. Why did they, whoever they are, throw her under the bus?
Again, the final lesson is fairly simple: a person can have all that a party claims to value, but, if the personality (gender?) isn’t right, those values are not recognized. The person is not valued. The public walks by sight, and not by faith. The public judges by appearances, outward appearances, and not by the heart. That is the cold fact.
The public can never be expected to judge righteously. Society can never achieve the moral responsibility of an individual. Society, the group, is always on a much lower level of response. Media always feeds into and off of that lower level.
I appreciate Michele Bachmann’s words of faith and confidence. She has more of both, for America, than I. I can only pray she continues to be an effective member of Congress, but, that’s a very low expectation, I’m afraid.
True conservative Protestants shall miss her immensely. If BadEagle.com has missed something vitally important in these assessments, we invite all manner of correction from the public.
Oh, yes. The idea suggested by Laura Ingraham than Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum collaborate is just more Catholic conniving on her part. Remember Newt is newly Catholic, even more so than Ingraham. Santorum is the only one born Catholic. Correct that.
Laura Ingraham, Catholic crusader.