Tweet Michele Bachmann, one of the eight or so GOP presidential hopefuls, has made up her own definition of the word "submissive." According to Oxford it means: "the action or fact of accepting or yielding to a superior force or to the will or authority of another person." Bachmann's definition of submission is "respect."
It's yet another example of politicians creating their own truth and in this case their own definition of a word.
It happened the other evening in Iowa when a conservative columnist asked Bachmann what she meant by her vow to be submissive to her husband. The audience booed the question, then Bachmann replied "what submission means to me -- if that's what your question is -- it means respect."
She needs to look up the definition.
Yet, what is more troubling than her answer is that the national press corps is letting her slide on it. No one, as far as I know, is calling her on it. It's really shameful. You'd think among the dozens of journalists following her campaign -- at least one would ask her the simple follow-up question: "if elected president, who will be making the decisions -- Bachmann or her husband?"
Bachmann, herself, created this whole situation -- recalling how she hated the idea of pursuing a degree in tax law and saying she did so only because her husband told her to. "The Lord says, Be submissive, wives. You are to be submissive to your husbands," she explained. That response begs the question -- who will be calling the shots at the White House if she is elected.
Bachmann is entitled to her religious beliefs, but she is not entitled to dodge a question about presidential power. She opened this discussion and the media have a duty to call her on it.
Come on colleagues -- step up and hold her accountable. For too long, politicians have been allowed to create their own truth and not be challenged by the media.