Michele Bachmann’s Marcus Bachmann Problem

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and her husband, Marcus Bachmann, greet the crowd at a campaign stop in South Carolina.Jason Moore</a>/Zuma

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Politico‘s James Hohmann published a story Tuesday on the unique role of Rep. Michele Bachmann’s husband, Marcus, on the campaign trail. Aside from the obvious points about how he’s had to pick up the slack on the home front since his wife left for Washington, the piece notes a few of the recent controversies that could become “liabilities” on the campaign trail—namely, the fact that his family farm received subsidies, and that his Christian therapy practice accepted Medicaid funding.

That might be a stretch. The fact that Marcus Bachmann received farm subsidies is bad because they’re the kind of government handout the candidate loves to hate, but it’s really not the kind of thing that sways voters—especially when you consider that a lot of Republican primary voters also receive farm subsidies. There is one part of the Marcus Bachmann story, though, that is already becoming an issue for the Bachmann campaign.

In addition to the fairly commonplace practice of accepting Medicaid payments, Bachmann’s Christian therapy clinic has also been accused of dabbling in something called “conversion” or “reparative” therapy, in which gay people are supposedly cured of their gayness through steady doses of prayer. The American Psychiatric Association does not endorse “conversion therapy” and has suggested it might have damaging mental health consequences. But as Hohmann’s story notes, Marcus Bachmann is not a member of any of Minnesota’s three major professional organizations for psychologists. For Marcus Bachmann, this is bigger than science; it’s a moral imperative. Gays, he has said, are like “barbarians” that need to be “disciplined.”

That’s extreme, and in a post-DADT, Cuomosexual world, it’s only going to become increasingly more so (even Focus on the Family has conceded that the younger generations feel differently about things like gay marriage). Because Michele has identified Marcus as her top adviser, he’s fair game for the criticism that would undoubtedly pour out if, say, top strategist Ed Rollins had said the same thing. Marcus Bachmann is the kind of character that candidates normally wouldn’t think twice about throwing under the bus, or at least keeping their distance from, once they’ve finally made it. But that’s obviously not possible.

The problems don’t end with the therapy, though. Marcus’ fiercely anti-gay language has itself spawned the predictable, unsubstantiated “takes one to know one” backlash. It’s taken less than a week for political observers and random celebrities on Twitter to develop their own theories about what’s really driving the candidate’s husband. Here’s what Cher (yes, Cher) tweeted on Friday, via the City Pages:

“But boys please utube this asshole & tell me what you think… Cause my Gay-Dar is GOING OFF !!!”

She then pondered purchasing some sequins for Marcus and strangling him with her boa. That’s a representative sample. Gawker‘s Lauri Apple rounds up some others:

Kids in the Hall comic and television actor Dave Foley, asked via Twitter: “How can Michele Bachman be opposed to gay marriage when she is married to gay man.” Foley…tweeted out a few other lines about Bachmann, using the hashtag “#MarcusBachmanIsSoGay.”
• Keith Olbermann referred to Bachmann as a “bizarre-sounding man who’s calling gays ‘barbarians'” and wondered how you can “hide” him without putting him in some sort of closet.

And so on. Apple also finds Andrew Sullivan (who is gay) referring to Marcus as the “ssuper-sserial hunter of gays.” This echoes something Bachmann’s loudest critics in Minnesota have been hinting at—without any basis in fact—for a while now. The writers of Dump Bachmann, who are the source of much of the most incriminating material on the couple, refer to Marcus as “the fabulous Marcus Bachmann” and enjoy noting that he has a keen fashion sense; on Tuesday, City Pages straight-up asked, “Marcus Bachmann: Gay or Straight?” David Joseph DeGrio, chair of the Minnesota LGBT group Stonewall DFL, has pushed back on the whisper campaign, writing that “I believe that perceived sexuality was being used as an attack on Marcus Bachmann, and I find it unacceptable to use perceived sexuality as an attack on anybody.”

Crude caricatures of candidate’s spouses are as unfair as they are inevitable. Teresa Heinz Kerry was foreign, Michelle Obama was Stokely Carmichael in a designer dress,” and Cindy McCain was a Stepford wife. In a world where Elena Kagan’s softball career was considered a legitimate national news story, the glare of the national spotlight is shaping up to be a very uncomfortable one for the would-be first couple.

UpdateWaPo‘s Jason Horowitz has a profile of Marcus Bachmann this morning as well. It doesn’t actually break any new ground, but it’s a quick read and gives some interesting background on where the couple is coming from.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate