Gotta Watch: Kids 1, Politicians 0
December 1st, 2011
04:40 PM ET

Gotta Watch: Kids 1, Politicians 0

Politicians need to be prepared for pretty much anything. Between the tabloids and reporters – every bit of what they say is scrutinized.   There are always going to be moments when politicians get caught off guard by the people they expect the least. You've gotta watch what happens when kids stump politicians on the tough questions starting with an incident between Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann and a teenager.

Teen vs. presidential candidate – Bachmann is questioned by a high school student about her stance on same-sex marriage at a town hall meeting in Iowa. Watch the testy exchange as she just won't let up. See the full video from iReporter Anelia Dimitrova here.

Student asks president bold question –  Check out how President Obama handles a student's question about using drugs, gambling and prostitution to stimulate the economy.

Perry caught off guard – This video between a little boy and  Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry is a prime example of a politician being caught off guard by the unexpected.  Watch how Perry fields questions about evolution and the kid's mom won't let him back down.

soundoff (265 Responses)
  1. MightyMoo

    Love the kids in the first video, they really nailed her good.

    December 2, 2011 at 12:19 pm | Report abuse |
  2. mn Guy

    Frist The Kid Is A plant The Mother Put the kid up to that? Bachman is Right, justice is blind Has every one forgot that laws is applied the same for all. GLB's are immoral group of people pushing the discusting belifs on others.GLB Groups should Repect other by not flunting there discusting life style in public. live and let live. but not the GLB they want to force what the beliefs on others. Thats wrong !

    December 2, 2011 at 12:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • biglib

      I hope you're a plant and not for real. If so I hope you don't really expect to be a good representative of the "right" with that kind of grammatical atrocity.

      December 2, 2011 at 12:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • mn Guy

      BigLIb Thaks for pointing that out. Ya no college here, I did not want to be brain washed like you. If you don't agree just attack attack, your way is the only way, Just like a worthless lib, thats all you are.

      December 2, 2011 at 12:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shannon

      It's hypocritical to accuse someone else of "attacking" when you're spouting off about how disgusting and immoral you think others are. And your spelling level is that of a 5th grader. A college education isn't required to spell words like "disgusting," "flaunting," and "beliefs." You can just use spell check for that since none of the ways you spelled those words are actual words. Also, if you really believed in "live and let live," you wouldn't have such a problem with gay people. I'm ashamed that you're from the same state as me.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:29 pm | Report abuse |
  3. MSoFNY

    -In my opinion God and Science are one and the same. We are dumbing down the concept of God when we believe that God created Earth in somany days and then created man and animals. God is even more complicated and even more sophesticated than even the most brilliant human on Earth can fathom. The laws of nature were created by god. Rest of what happens falls within those laws. So indirectly God controls everything. The Creationism theory was probably invented way back when the body of knowledge was limited and people's brain was not open enough to digest more advanced concepts about God. Looks like some people have locked up their imagination and threw away the key. If God were to appear today he would definitely admonish us and say that he has been trying to communicate to us through the laws of nature but that we were too stupid to open our minds to see it.-

    December 2, 2011 at 12:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Sounds like you are a Pantheist. Your concept of God is not Christian though.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • WampeterNine

      He? If one is to argue that open minds an imagination are critical to evolving our understanding of God (not at all a bad premise), a good place to start might be letting go of the idea that God can be personified as a male. Especially as a white male with a beard (often with blue eyes) that lives on fluffy clouds. No disrespect intended to your comments, which I believe have some validity, but one must be careful not to admonish with one hand (reimagine god, people) and subscribe to outmoded ideas with the other (god is a he, and could be comprehended as a single appearance, possibly similiar to a human). For me, God, by the very definition of the concept, is that which we don't, can't, and won't ever understand. It is obvious to me that there are a great many mysterious and wonderful things that we don't understand (still in this age of science), and that is where my awe and spirituality reside. But any person or organization that claims to understand the nature of "God", or personifies that nature or gives it a will that can be understood by humans, is simply engaging in errant pride at the best, and downright manipulation at the worst.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      @injustice – even though the majority of Christians in the US are creationists, they are a minority amongst Christians in the world. There are 2 billion Christians on earth. 90% of them – 1.8 billion – belong to sects whose official position is that there is no problem with a faith in god and an understanding that evolution is a fact. It is only amongst the fundamentalists that we see this mandate to have a literalist interpretation of Genesis.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • Reality

      How is this not christian? The basic concept of Christianity is to follow the teachings of Christ of the new testament, as well as take lessons from the old testament to form your own moral code based on lessons taught through a list of stories. Are you saying God isn't smart enough to have created a more steady style of creation that would allow both man and beast to adjust to their environment gradually? I'm certain that Science and Religion CAN go hand in hand, and I am in awe of every creation on earth by the hands of our great and powerful God. I believe that every day is a miracle, every atom speaks God's love and every breath is a precious gift and hint towards the meaning of life.

      Dont you find it a bit judgemental to assume some one's beliefs aren't Christian because they consider a different beginning or concept than you do?

      December 2, 2011 at 1:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      How is it not Christian to be a Pantheist? The answer is pretty obvious.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Knowing the definition of a Pantheist and how to differentiate between a Christian and a Pantheist does not make someone judgemental. It just means I have a functioning brain or a dictionary and reading comprehension.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rick

      Yet that is exactly what your bible says. So are you saying you are making up your own religion as you go?

      December 2, 2011 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • chuck

      "If God were to appear today he would definitely admonish us and say that he has been trying to communicate to us through the laws of nature but that we were too stupid to open our minds to see it.-"
      He did 2000 years ago, his name is Jesus, and you were.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • Brook

      @injustice I don't think you know what Pantheism is. A Pantheist does not believe in a god creator but rather that god and nature are one in the same. That is not what MSoFNY was saying. He is just saying that nature and the world are just too complex to have happened naturally and that God had to create it. But that does not mean it was necessarily in seven 24 hour days as fundamentalists believe.

      I too believe in Creation through Evolution. I think man's concept of God is too small to comprehend, and that a day to God is not necessarily a day to man. So when the bible says God created the world in a day, the question is: what is a day to God? Heck, the earth didn't even exist for the first few days of the creation. Therefore, how can one judge what is a full rotation of the Earth or 24 hours? That is what MSoFNY is saying. Old Testament man most likely did not comprehend the vastness of God. This is why you also see references to physical manifestations of God such as the burning bush. It is Old Testament man's attempt to try and truly break down the vastness and awesomeness of God to a level they can understand, and is not necessarily a literal depiction.

      I personally find the interplay of physics, chemistry and biology to be entirely to complex to be just created by happenstance. It is my opinion that science actually proves the existence of God when it describes systems so intricate and detailed. Evolution too is so complex and amazing, one can only truly understand it if you realize that it was the hand of God.

      That ... is not Pantheism.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      You are correct. I noticed when someone quoted his comment as saying that the God he describes would admonish humanity. Pantheists don't ascribe simple minded human attributes to their God. I am glad that you don't shun Science but it is fundamentally unscientific to say that Science which is based on the scientific theory, can prove or disprove the existence of something that is by definition, Unscientific. As far as the God issue goes it stands on equal footing with unicorns and the flying spaghetti monster. R'amen.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • chuck

      @Brook – that's ironic – "I think man's concept of God is too small to comprehend, and that a day to God is not necessarily a day to man." I think your concept of God is too small. You really think God needed more time to speak the world into existence? An awesome God is one that is not limited by laws of nature. No – he's not limited by time – neither was man at Creation. Man was created to be an eternal being, until sin came in. But, God is the one that declared time and he said the evening and the morning was a day. Let me ask you a question – if God created Adam as the Bible says, then how old was Adam when he created him? Did he have to wait until he grew up to communicate with him? Adam being minutes old probably looked 30 years old. The Earth being days old probably look millions of years old. Your God is too small to be able to do that.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • gofish

      God in infinitely smarter and more powerful than any human will ever realize. We try to rationalize everything through religion and non-religion. Take the creation of the earth. Many believe in the big bang theory and many believe in the earth was created (by the biblical calendar) as few as a 10 thousand years ago. It states that a day with God is LIKE a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day. This leaves an infinite time line as to how old the earth is and how it was created. God could have thought a thought and the Earth and the Universe exploded into being. The bible doesn't say what he done to create it. Don't be so narrow minded and look around. Everything you see can't be, CAN'T BE a coincidence. Man kind in its infinite beauty and vastly complicated self. It can't be a coincidence. Get away from religion and get a personal, PERSONAL relation ship with God and you will begin to have an understanding of what He is about. It will be small to start. About the size of a grain of sand but that is a start and I doubt anyone of us will ever surpass that in knowing all of His glory. Sorry I sound like I am preaching but get away from formal religion and you will discover a newness that anyone can come to be a part of his kingdom.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • chuck

      "Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding." Be careful those who proclaim to be Christian and want to water down the Bible. Learn what it says before you try to explain it. It says plainly that he spoke the world into existence and it has timelines. It and you were created for his glory – not your own. Man's greatest deeds are as filthy rags before the Lord. What's more dangerous than someone who totally denies the Bible? Someone who tries to make excuses for his beliefs and tries to reconcile those beliefs with those of Non-Believers while calling himself a Believer. That is someone who is lukewarm. "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."

      December 2, 2011 at 3:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      Brooke wrote, " I personally find the interplay of physics, chemistry and biology to be entirely to complex to be just created by happenstance."

      All this means is that you have chosen to be ignorant about physics, chemistry, and biology.

      Perhaps if you would get your science information from science sources, like college level classes, visits to museums and research centers, reading of general science journals like Science and Nature, etc., would wouldn't things to complex?

      December 2, 2011 at 4:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • chuck

      Wow Prime I'm glad you have all of those subjects figured out. I've known and read about PHDs in all of those catagories that say the deeper they dig the more complex they realize it is, and because of that, they have come to the conclusion that there has to be a higher power that created and controls it all. They say there is no way that this complexity could have come about by chance. One of those guys was just featured on CNN the other day. Maybe you could give us a lesson some time.

      December 2, 2011 at 4:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Chuck, there are also other scientists, probably more esteemed then the ones you failed to name, who are at the top of their fields and deny any need for a God. Steven Hawkings being one. You prove nothing and have absolutely no argument for the existence or non existence of God or the tooth fairy. Keep saving those teeth and try to realize that as soon as you inject God into Science you lose all credibility and are no longer a scientist. End of story.

      December 2, 2011 at 4:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • chuck

      Injustice – very well put. Believe it or not – I can deal with people who totally reject God and just believe in Science. I think you're wrong but, I can deal with that. I have a harder time with others who want to degrade the Bible to insert their scientific beliefs. Now – that doesn't mean that I am so simple not to recognize the complexity that I believe God created – nor, will I appologize for that. You may call it Scientific Laws – I call it God's Laws. What I really find interesting is your use of Stephen Hawking (no s) as an example. You believe in a man who from the worlds eyes would have every reason to hate God and bash God. A diseased man who doesn't "need God" but, needs everyone else to take care of him. Yet, I believe in a man who was God and healed the diseased and lame. I'll take my belief over your's any day. By the way, the tooth fairy is real – to our kids she's known as Mom.

      December 2, 2011 at 5:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • chuck

      Injustice – Oh and by the way, Isaac Newton was one of those that believed in God. And at one point, Einstein also made that comment.

      December 2, 2011 at 5:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Chuck, Im aware of the fact that Newton believed in god's existence. I shudder to think what would have happened to him had he denied it (I believe Einstein was a Pantheist). However even they, for all their accomplishments have never proven Gods existence. They had a faith that is separate from the "Laws of Science". Only by imagination, not scientific proof, were any of them able to "reconcile" their faith with science. They did prove that Science is rock solid and probably one of man's greatest accomplishments. I hope it doesn't sound like an attack but I find your analogy for Steven Hawking to be ignorant and disgusting. Hawking has no reason whatsoever to bash God. He has done more for the world and gained more knowledge than any walking man I've encountered. Steven Hawking's accomplishments make me feel like Im the one who has failed at living. In reality we all live with handicaps. Just that some are more visible than others. I would say that Hawking has more than made up for his and is beyond your level in many ways.

      December 2, 2011 at 6:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      Chuck wrote, "Wow Prime I'm glad you have all of those subjects figured out. I've known and read about PHDs in all of those catagories that say the deeper they dig the more complex they realize it is, and because of that, they have come to the conclusion that there has to be a higher power that created and controls it all."

      Sorry Chuck, but it's about 99.95% of all scientists in the relevant fields related to life sciences who support the ToE. On the other hand, your side is fraught with fake scientists like Kent "Dr. Dino" Hovind. I like how the fundiot (fundamentalist ldiot) group AIG puts it on their website, "By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record."

      Is this really how you want to roll Chuck?

      December 2, 2011 at 9:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Clarissa

      except science has scientific proof and faith is there by defined believing in something with no proof. sooooo...

      December 10, 2011 at 1:21 am | Report abuse |
  4. tkindsm

    seems like she answered it just fine – don't think the student is 1 up on her. Love how CNN tried to make it so. There is no right since its not in the laws. Change the laws. Then they would have that right.

    December 2, 2011 at 12:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Bachman says that gays have equal rights because a gay man can marry a straight woman just like any straight man can marry a straight woman. Sounds a lot like someone saying a black man can only marry a black woman and a white man can only marry a white woman. I guess we know what side she would be on if she was a politician during the civil rights movement. I guess that answer is just fine if you are a bigot.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      I suggest you read the unanimous decision from SCOTUS in Loving v. Virginia. Marriage is indeed a fundamental civil right. Sorry

      December 2, 2011 at 1:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • Brad

      Her answer was very stupid. The law itself favors one group, period. If it was really fair, the law would say that men and women can marry a partner of their chosing. Her answer is a typical, hateful, christian answer.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • crabman

      hay inj no one said anything about color so stuff it - all i heard is some smart azz teen thinking she is smarter and lookin like she dose isn't helping her any looks more like elmer fudd

      December 2, 2011 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • crabman

      thats right brad the law is the law-– hate on dud

      December 2, 2011 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Crabman, If you cant understand what I wrote and how it is directly linked to the 3rd grade answer Bachmann gave then I suggest you have your brain checked by a professional because something is broken in there.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:02 pm | Report abuse |
  5. tkindsm

    C N N you are so dang biased i listened to the Perry one and he did fine answering it as well. He didn't push his belief on the kid and told him they teach both theories in Texas where he is from.

    December 2, 2011 at 12:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • HerpDerp69

      Agreed, he answered the question fine and didn't force his views. He told the kid that he thought he was smart enough to decide on his own. CNN is just as biased as Fox news and it shows in their "journalism."

      December 2, 2011 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      By only teaching the Christian version of Creationism and not the Indian or Muslim or any other he is indeed pushing his faith on us.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      Perry was wrong. Texas does not teach creationism. No state can teach creationism in science class. Why? Because it isn't science. Plus, which myth do you teach? There are 2 different ones in Genesis 1 and 2. Plus, each and every tribe, culture, society, etc. had at least one creation myth. We think there are over 1,000 different creation myths. Each of these myths is mutually exclusive, meaning no 2 or more, can be true. Your creation myth is no more, nor no less special than any of the others. The only thing all these myths have in common is the evidence the have to support themselves. And that would be zip. Zilch. Zero. Nada.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Anthony

      I by no means am a supporter of Perry. I personally think the guy is least qualified out of the republican field...but it sounded like a solid answer to the question...By the way the question actaully sounded more like a Newt/Romney Follower using her child to get her political agenda across by forcing her kid to ask questions she wanted to know the answer to.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      @Anthony – it wasn't a solid answer from Perry. It was an answer that shows he chooses to be ignorant about basic science. Science he should have learned in Junior High.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rick

      I don't think you know the meaning of the word "theory"just like most Christians. If I say I have a theory that the universe was created by and is controlled by the flying spaghetti monster that is not a valid theory. Just as saying that because thousands of years ago some primitive people imagined there was a different god running things that that is a valid theory. Making stuff up does not create a theory. It creates fairy tales.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • lunchbreaker

      I'd be okay with teaching intellegent design. In fact it should go something like this:

      There are 2 theories about the origins of the universe. The first is that it was created by God. Now for the rest of the school year we will discuss the second.

      December 2, 2011 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
  6. smthnice

    It's interesting that marriage isn't a "privilege," it's a law, yet the result of that law are perks like health insurance, inheritance, child custody rights ect...

    December 2, 2011 at 1:33 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Phil

    See what religion does folks? It divides us. It tells us that you are different than we are, therefore you are condemned to hell - etc.

    Do the sensible thing and dumb religion for a personal relationship with reality.

    December 2, 2011 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |


    December 2, 2011 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • jim

      well ... clear, anyways. not especially honest since, once again, she doesn't speak truthfully.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Im assuming that your comment is to be interpreted as sarcasm. If not then I can only interpret it as the ramblings of an uneducated bigot. The founders where Deists and they are quoted as saying they deny the "divinity" of Jesus.

      December 2, 2011 at 1:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • crabman

      hay injustice don.t you have a bible to burn or a mormon to burn a the the stake or poke a stick in someones eye

      December 2, 2011 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • injustice

      Crabman, LOL

      December 2, 2011 at 2:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lulu

      "THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUND UNDER GOD" ? What does that mean? They rolled god over and found this country hiding under it? Was the rest of the world under god too?

      December 3, 2011 at 10:38 pm | Report abuse |
  9. awake

    truth has nothing to do with consensus. Nothing.
    question what the majority hold up as truth.
    question authority.
    encourage and support equality–unconditionally.
    we have the collective power to tip the scales.
    hats off to the young woman who challenged Bachman's truth.

    December 2, 2011 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • Clarissa

      well said

      December 10, 2011 at 1:27 am | Report abuse |
  10. Michael

    Michelle handled the question correctly. She was asked a question, on the spot, about a topic most people shy away from and she didn't hesitate to answer the question directly. That is a plus, considering most politicians try to side step or ignore tough questions. It was a serious question that needed a serious answer. Whether you agree or disagree with Michelle's answer has nothing to do with whether she handled the question wisely and responsibly.
    She also brought up a good point. All Americans have the right to marry. No one is telling anyone they can’t get married. There are just laws and guidelines that govern marriage. No different than a speed limit. Having a speed limit doesn't mean nobody can drive, it just means when you do, you have to obey the law and guidelines set forth. Well, I guess I should mention, before the argument is brought up, that I know and understand speed limits and marriage are two totally opposite things and are not related. However, the point is the principle remains true through most if not all of our laws, no matter the situation.

    December 2, 2011 at 2:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      "All Americans have the right to marry. No one is telling anyone they can’t get married."

      So the Lovings should have just given up? Was SCOTUS wrong to take the case? Was SCOTUS wrong in their unanimous decision?

      You know, half of all republicans in a poll in Mississippi last April said that interracial marriage should be illegal.

      A bigot is a bigot is a bigot. Sorry.

      December 2, 2011 at 4:26 pm | Report abuse |
  11. SwissMiss

    Sooooo...about that non-violent crime legalization. I vote yes.

    December 3, 2011 at 1:35 am | Report abuse |
  12. Ugh

    Yeah that kid.... Err mom got the best of him. I happen to believe there is no conflict with creationism and evolutionism. Consider the universe a record album. God created the album in seven days. God then metaphorically put the needle on the track ~10k years ago.

    December 6, 2011 at 6:21 am | Report abuse |
  13. Kaedn

    Always rerfhesing to hear a rational answer.

    January 3, 2012 at 9:19 am | Report abuse |
  14. iufhqkdqck

    VMvZGa omdltayjdmjm

    January 4, 2012 at 3:12 am | Report abuse |
  15. kghgpqtlpo

    IF842d mbtwtyeczjwo

    January 6, 2012 at 6:46 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6