Michele Bachmann: radical pro-choice feminist?

Fo realz?!?

“That’s why people need to continue to go to the town halls, continue to melt the phone lines of their liberal members of Congress, and let them know, under no certain circumstances will I give the government control over my body and my health care decisions.

Umm… Michele? Maybe you should think really hard about those words that just came out of your mouth?

Here’s Michele on a typical (bad) day:

Similar Posts (automatically generated):

This entry was posted in Health, Reproductive Rights and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Michele Bachmann: radical pro-choice feminist?

  1. Pamela says:

    Let’s not stop there. We need to take it to the streets and inform the poor and working class who access reproductive health services.

  2. Kyra says:

    It would be hilarious if people “misunderstood” and she got flooded with letters thanking her for becoming pro-choice.

    Or if she never managed to speak another word about abortion without people bringing this quote up and accusing her of hypocrisy along the lines of “some are more equal than others.”

  3. Joe Sonka says:

    ooooooh, Kyra, that’s a wonderful idea. In fact, I think I’ll write her an open letter right now, thanking her for now seeing the light ;)

    This calls for an email campaign!

  4. SunlessNick says:

    Excellent idea, Kyra.

  5. BadKitty says:


    Mailing Address:
    PO Box 25950
    Woodbury, MN 55125

  6. johnathen duran says:

    Y’all really need a direct facebook link on your list of sharesites…for ease of sharing. I love this blog, but the copy/paste back-and-forth is tedious.

  7. Ms. T says:

    So what does everyone plan to do when the government gets even more involved in our health care and a third Bush and a republican majority get to make the rules? Keeping the gov. off of your body should not end at your reproductive organs.

  8. Jadey says:

    Hm, this isn’t totally inconsistent with what I’ve read about expressions of feminism on the conservative side. Rebecca Klatch wrote about conservative feminism in the 1980s (her book is called Women of the New Right, and there’s someone at my university studying the next generation of feminist-identified women on the political right. And, yeah, the approach to abortion from a laissez-faire perspective is that the government should first and foremost not be funding such a thing or getting involved on that level. (And I would guess that the additional more socially-conservative assumption is that if the government stopped funding it, the free market would naturally tend towards people not wanting abortions and therefore the “artificially inflated” business would collapse? I guess?)

    This is not me agreeing with her, just that I have seen this logic quite a few times before.

  9. Jadey says:

    Ooookay, but now I’ve read some more about Michele Bachman and I can see that logic doesn’t necessarily enter into it. :D

  10. Politicalguineapig says:

    *Sigh* Yet another incident of Rep. Bachmann deepthroating her own foot. If anyone’s here from Stillwater, would you like to explain what the heck’s in the water over there?

  11. leah says:

    Ploliticalguineapig – you don’t want to know :P Mostly farm runoff and mutated fish.

    Her district does happen to be the most conservative (and I might add richest) single swath of the state, born of some very creative redistricting. I’m quite sure her job is to wave her arms and loudly proclaim “See! MN isn’t a librul state! Conservatives are here too! (implied: Elect Pawlenty President! Even crazy librul backwards MN loves neocons!)” nevermind that if Pawlenty did win the nom, I doubt MN would go for him. He certainly knew he couldn’t get a 3rd term as guv.

  12. ShinyMae says:

    Oh this made me piss my chair, yesterday!

    Tarryl Clark had better use this quote in her speeches and attack ads next year!

  13. Niki says:

    This is why this is hilarious:

    In the context she meant it, the quote doesn’t even make sense. Publicizing health care will by no means lead to decreased control over your body. Trust me Michelle, I’m Canadian, I know. It means the government will be paying for your care, for your own decisions. It means you will have more freedom over your body because you won’t be financially prevented doing what you need to do. And by forcibly keeping health care in the hands of private companies and industry, you are contributing to a culture where people can’t control their own bodies because they can’t afford to.

  14. jm says:

    Politicalguineapig- Actually, the (politically conservative) woman who was the head of the EPA and lived in Stillwater told an acquaintance of mine that she didn’t drink the city water. Take that as you will.

  15. Sophist says:

    Umm… Michele? Maybe you should think really hard about those words that just came out of your mouth?

    Why would she? Not doing so got her a job in congress.

  16. Sara Pulis says:

    Wow, all those “profits” and they gave me year of the pill followed by an IUD and several pap smears for no charge. As I recall, my pocket wasn’t picked while I was in there. Hmmm…

Comments are closed.