Monday, August 20, 2012

Republican Wacko Should Resign Now

This is going to be a nasty article and some of you won’t like it. I don’t care. I’m finding myself really pissed off at the retard who will be representing our side in the Missouri Senate Primary. His name is Todd Akin and he seemed pretty decent until his dogma shut down his brain. He needs to resign.

Akin was asked this weekend during a television interview about his view on whether or not abortion should be allowed in the case of rape. His answer was this:
“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
By which he meant that victims rarely get pregnant from “legitimate rapes.” He then stated that he thinks abortion should be banned in the case of rape.

Uh... f*ck you.

First of all, what is a legitimate rape? And what kind of piece of sh*t would believe that rape comes in degrees of legitimacy? I hate the word “insensitive,” but I can’t imagine a better use for it than the way Akin just smeared rape victims. This is so reminiscent of Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams, who obnoxiously said about the rain: “It’s a lot like rape. As long as it’s inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it.”

That a human being would utter either of these statements is frankly incomprehensible to me. How f*cked up do you need to be to believe that only certain rapes matter or that rape is something women should enjoy? Where does the Republican Party keep finding these sex-obsessed troglodytes?

Secondly, what is this crap that somehow the female body “has ways to shut the whole thing down”? Where does this medical quackery come from? If a doctor said this, they would lose their medical license for incompetence. If a teenager said this, we would laugh at them for being stupid. Yet here a grown “man” says this? This is dogma, this is not science. This is a man who believes in witchcraft, who sees women as unclean deceivers, and who fears the atheists under his bed. This is not a man whose judgment can be trusted. This is the kind of crap which gives Christians a bad name.

Akin, of course, apologized for this obscenity, but this is one of those moments where you can’t un-ring a bell. We now know what he believes, and this is not a man I would want near any female I knew and I sure as heck don’t want him in a position to represent my side of the aisle on women’s issues. He is unfit and needs to resign.

And let me say, this is exactly why young professional women will never vote Republican, but that’s not even what bothers me here. What bothers me is that a man with a Fourteenth Century understanding of sexual relations could be chosen to serve in the United States Senate. He needs to resign. If he doesn’t, I will support McCaskill.

Conservatives need to rid themselves of these people.

And while I’m at it, let me say that if you believe women should be forced to carry children to term when they’ve been raped, then you are wrong. There is no legal or moral justification for your position. You are suggesting sexual slavery. You are suggesting that you have the right to victimize these women every single day until they give birth because you think your religion tells you to use the force of law to control others. You are wrong.

UPDATED: It is now being reported that Akin will resign. Good. But there's one more bit to add to the story. The mouth-breathers at the Family Research Council have been giving strong support to Akin throughout the day. Their president Tony Perkins claims this is nothing more than an attempt to distract from the record of that unclean woman Claire McCaskill and Satan’s workshop at Planned Parenthood. Pathetic. Seriously, if you don't see the problem with this, then there is something wrong with you.

144 comments:

T-Rav said...

I voted for Akin in the primary, because he seemed to me to be the best conservative in the race, record-wise and all. He seems to me to be a decent man, who didn't mean to give offense to rape victims.

That said....

There are two basic rules I think you shouldn't violate in any campaign, but especially when the electorate favors your party and a victory is kind of a gimme. 1) Don't call black people the n-word. 2) Don't say something like "legitimate rape" or that it's not a big deal pregnancy-wise. There is literally no way that can turn out well for you, and whatever Akin meant to say, it bodes no good that he couldn't think fast enough to turn it into something acceptable.

As much as it pains me to say this, I think he needs to quit. Whatever his intentions, he has been defined for the rest of the race, and I was getting the impression his people didn't really know what they were doing already. Despite my regard for Akin, I cannot tolerate six more years of McHagskill, especially when we practically had her in checkmate. Get someone else.

DUQ said...

Wow Andrew, so you have no strong feelings on this huh?

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I liked him too when I first learned of him and I was hoping he would win the primary, but this is just wrong. To me, this isn't even about electoral politics, this is about someone whose thought processes are so twisted that he should not be trusted with decision-making authority. This isn't a slip where you use a word you don't really mean or you get confused and say something backwards. To me, this is clear evidence that this man has issues. And the fact FRC would support him even afterwards and would try to dismiss this as just politics tells me a lot about their value.

BevfromNYC said...

Bravo Andrew! You'll get no argument from me. I absolutely agree with you 100%.

AndrewPrice said...

DUQ, No, I am not happy about this by any stretch. Conservatism and frankly Christianity, need to purge themselves of these kind of people.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Bev, this really bothers me. I know people to whom this has happened and this is just beyond the pale of reasonable society.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I heard him say that he misspoke or something and regretted offending people. But...no, you can't say you misspoke. Your tongue couldn't possibly trip over itself enough times to accidentally say those words. The only thing he could have said in defense is that he got the information from someone else but that he had now been told this was untrue, and he regretted it. I don't even know if that's true, but that's the only thing he could have said as a plausible defense. You can't say you misspoke.

Patriot said...

This reminds me of the leftist's position on abortion.......anytime, anyplace, anywhere, anyreason. When we have two extreme views on something as intimate as forced sexual relations (violent rape) and females who becomes pregnant through casual sex, there has to be a common ground. While free abortions anytime are abhorrent, so is the thought of carrying to term a child who was conceived through no desire of the mother.

About the only discernible effect of the 30+ million abortions since 1973, is the "Roe Effect," whereby the vast majority of aborted babies are from liberals and not conservatives. Imagine the effect of ~30 million more liberals under the age of 39. While no abortion is "good" the unintended consequences of the lefts' devotion to unfettered abortion are probably playing out right now as our country appears to be trending more "conservative."

I credit the Internet more so than the Roe effect, but it's got to make a difference.

Patriot said...

Must be "Monday Doubles" Day

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I agree. This is not one of those moments where you can misspeak. Misspeaking is using the wrong name or stating something backwards from what you intended. This was clearly something he believes and he meant to say. His mistake was in not realizing how out of touch this is.

I hope he resigns immediately so the MO GOP can replace him quickly.

T-Rav said...

FYI: Some of the technicalities are a bit fuzzy, but per state rules, a candidate has until 5:00 p.m. the 11th Tuesday before the election--that is, tomorrow--to drop out and be replaced. GOP bigwigs, from Romney on down, and the NRSC in particular, are putting the squeeze on Akin to drop out in the next 24 hours; if not, he's going to be persona non grata as far as the rest of the party is concerned. No money, no ads, no nothing.

It's not clear what he's going to do yet. The latest is that he's going to hold a "prayer vigil" tonight, but has no plans to end his campaign. Terrific.

AndrewPrice said...

Patriot, That's actually probably true that liberals are more likely to have abortions. So that could well explain why the country has moved steadily to the right.

In any event, I agree with you about the two extremes and I think it takes a truly sick mind to think that the government should have the right to force a woman who was raped to carry the baby to term.

AndrewPrice said...

Monday doubles?

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Any idea if the party can run an alternative candidate if he doesn't drop out?

Individualist said...

Well I was not sure what was said or who said it. All I heard was someone had said "legitimate rape" and quite frankly the term confused me. now that I know the context, yea this guy said something really stupid.

That being said I think you can have the position that a living human is a living human no matter what the circumstances. I don't see how you can take the position that a fetus is a living being with rights to life and then decide well not if it was teh product of a rape.

A rape is a horrible thing and I can udnerstand a woman who desired this. but if abortion is murder then two wrongs don't make a right. As to how to be "sensitive" regarding the issue well that is just impossible. There is nothing anyone can say or do to a woman in that situation that can make it better. The whole thing is an awful tragedy.

I think part of the problem is that the issue of abortion is an emotionallly charged one. Yet in politics both sides attack each other regarding it as if it were a clever word game.

I am assuming by "legitimate rape" the man was trying to acknowledge the difference between a rape and a false claim of rape but really that distinction is not necessary to the argument and it came across wrong.

I think it probably best for a candidate to write a postion paper on the issue, maybe one page and release it to the public and refuse to answer questions on it. The issue is never going to be resolved by anyone on either side so what benefit can possibly be gained by disscussing it in your campaign.

As to the shutting down thing the only thing I can think of is that a woman's physiology is such that if she has an orgasm during sex that man's sprem is more likely to conceive. While this is true in no way would it stop unwanted sperm so the statement is severely flawed. Maybe the guy was watching the discovery channel and only half heard the documentary explanation. Who knows....

ellenB said...

Hear hear, Andrew! This was a disgusting comment which gave us an insight into a man I don't want in office on my side.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

I think this guy should drop out for health reasons. Foot in Mouth Disease.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Isn't that the truth! The sad thing is that he probably still doesn't understand what was so wrong about what he said.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I don't know about that. I would certainly support such an effort. Let me nose around for a minute.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Ellen. This pissed me off.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Let's hope he resigns and makes this easier.

AndrewPrice said...

Indi, Life doesn't give you simple choices, and humans always need to weigh one set of rights against another. But to think that it's acceptable to force a mother to carry an unborn child to term when she's been raped is frankly sick. Why don't we force people to start handing in organs to save the lives of others?

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: That remark was as stupid and as obnoxious as Whoopi Goldberg's defense of Roman Polanski's child molestation as not being "rape rape." The difference is, she's not running for the Senate. The man needs to withdraw from the race immediately. There is no way for him to talk himself out of this. He has made an ignorant, sexist, and terrible statement that disqualifies him from serious consideration. It would be a shame to lose what might have been a Senate seat because of a moron like him.

ellenB said...

Andrew, I agree. If a mother feels it's wrong to abort the baby, that's one thing. For other people to think they can force the mother to give birth is disgusting.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I agree. But we'll see. If he's at all self-aware then he will resign. But if he thinks that he was right all along, then he might stick it out. I would hate to lose what should be an easy seat because of this, but I would not support him in the election.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, after checking through the state's web page, according to our statutes a write-in campaign (but not a regular independent run) can still be launched; the deadline's pretty late on that. But--and here's the catch--anyone who ran in the primary for this office and lost is expressly forbidden from making such a run. And the other primary candidates would be the obvious figures to rally around. So, we may be kind of screwed.

AndrewPrice said...

Ellen, It's twisted. And it's the kind of thing which will hold back the pro-life movement if its members keep saying things like this and advocating things like that.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

I think the one of two that were in the Primary should be selected. Not a hack that the establishment GOP have ready. Steelman is a woman and backed by Palin. The other is a Tea Party favorite. Both of them poll better than McCaskill.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Crap. So they would need to find some new candidate altogether. What a mess. Let's hope he resigns and makes this easy. I think the GOP can definitely win the seat if he steps down.

Hopefully, the pressure will push him. My fear is that he will now pretend that he's learned his lesson and will decide to continue after claiming he's a new man.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I agree. I would say Steelman is probably a great choice in light of this comment.

ScyFyterry said...

Yeah, this was messed up. I remember the Clayton comment too and that was another one that just shocked you that someone would say that.

T-Rav said...

Joel and Andrew, I think that getting Steelman (who I do not like) as a replacement would be the best option, given the circumstances. She would probably have the inside track within the GOP Central Committee, which would decide a replacement, anyway. But it all hinges on what's going on in Akin's head right now, and who knows what that is.

Someone on another blog just said of him, "Someone needs to send him a dead fish wrapped in newspaper." LOL

ScyFyterry said...

Indi, How does it make sense to force a woman to have a child? This isn't anything she did wrong and punishing her in this most intimate way is more than cruel and unusual.

AndrewPrice said...

Terry, It is messed up and the Williams thing was messed up. And he went down in flames because of it, opening the door for Ann Richards.

Joel Farnham said...

T-Rav,

If so, then the Missouri GOP must grab an acceptable alternative from the Tea Party or Conservative group. Anything that smacks of a RINO hack like Dede Scuzzyface will be vilified, justifiably or not.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I have no real opinion of Steelman versus the other guy, but after something like this, it probably makes political sense to appoint a woman to replace him.

I'm glad there's a mechanism to replace him though. I was concerned it could be one of those where you would need a special election or maybe even not be able to run a candidate.

Somebody should smack him with the dead fish. From the sound of things, all his funding and friends are turning on him, so if he sticks this out then he's doing it purely for ego reasons.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, If I were advising the GOP, I would definitely go with one of the two from the primary rather than some insider. That would be a huge mistake to appoint someone who didn't even run (unless there's no choice like T-Rav said about the write-in situation).

AndrewPrice said...

Terry, I'm not sure Indi is saying he supports that, but I'll leave it to him to address. But my view is clear.

ScyFyterry said...

Andrew, LOL! Yes, you've been very clear in your views. :)

DUQ said...

I've given this a lot of thought and I agree with you Andrew across the board.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, there is a mechanism in place, but only if he agrees to step down, and that's not at all clear. He's going to be holding a "prayer vigil" tonight, I guess to pray the nays away or something. (sigh) I should have known when he was endorsed by Mike Huckabee.

AndrewPrice said...

Terry, I'm not a fan of mincing words.

AndrewPrice said...

DUQ, :)

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Let's hope he does the right thing.

You know, to me, this is the sort of thing which just reflects so poorly on conservatism and Christianity. This is what keeps normal people seeing devout Christians as way out there. I would hope more Christian groups (especially Religious Right ones) would condemn this.

Doc Whoa said...

I hadn't heard of this, but now I see that it's taking over the entire news cycle. If this guy is any sort of team player, he will bow out.

Doc Whoa said...

T-Rav, Thanks for looking all that up. I guess we got lucky this happened now and not next week?

T-Rav said...

Doc, we'll see how lucky we are.

Doc Whoa said...

T-Rav, At least we have a chance to be lucky! Now we just need to hope he does the right thing. I can't imagine he would try to stay in the race if he was rational. Almost everyone on the right is now calling for him to quit. Only people on the left or the far-out fringe on the right are telling him to stay in the race.

Tam said...

there's an article on Drudge that says he's taking steps to withdraw.

T-Rav said...

Look, I've avoided this specific part of it so far, but if it's going to come up, well then. I do not support abortion in cases of rape or incest. And no, I can't even imagine what that must be like for the woman who's been victimized. Unlike some people, I don't believe anyone has an obligation to make babies; if a woman decides she wants to put her career first and not worry about having kids, that's entirely up to her. So to have a plan for your life all worked out, and then to be not only sexually violated but to face a reminder of it for the next nine months--that must be really hellish.

But as bad as that is, what's in the womb is still a human life, and I can't condone removing it from this world as payback. That fetus has done nothing; it doesn't understand what "rape" is and has no intention of harming anyone; and if the rule of law means anything, it means not punishing a third party for someone else's crime. (Okay, it also means other things, but it surely includes that.)

I'm sure I'm outnumbered on this, but I don't care. And it doesn't make what Akin said any better. But that's what I think about the issue.

T-Rav said...

Doc, but there's no telling how rational he is. That's the problem.

Tam, that report may be dated. I think his refusals to drop out are more recent.

Tam said...

Yep...looks like the updates are suggesting he's sticking it out. Blech. This whole thing and all it's implications are upsetting.

Doc Whoa said...

T-Rav, As a personal view, I can agree. But as a government policy, I can't. I see a huge difference between stopping abortion for people who are just careless and forcing a mother to have a child when she's been raped.

DUQ said...

According to Drudge, Hannity told Akin to withdraw during an interview with him! Ann Coulter is calling for him to resign for the good of the country.

This is a mess.

T-Rav said...

Doc, fair enough. Goodness knows, I'd take even that over the current monstrosity of abortion laws.

Doc Whoa said...

T-Rav, I think abortion should be rare and not done without a lot of counseling. But I draw the line at somthing like this where a woman would be forced to keep being punished day after day for something done to her against her will.

Joel Farnham said...

The last I heard of it is Akin is going to have a "prayer vigil" and talk to his aides. That he is trying to find a graceful way to back out. So, I think this will be decided one way or another tomorrow by mid-morning.

AndrewPrice said...

Doc, Now you've heard. And yes, this is easily grabbing the news cycle. It's fortunate this isn't closer to the election because a couple days lost won't matter much. Plus, as long as he resigns, this will become a non-issue, even as the Democrats are trying to turn this into an indictment of the GOP and conservatives generally.

ScottDS said...

Andrew

My reaction to your article. :-)

Y'all know me and you know I'm certainly open and sympathetic to right-of-center views but guys like this are why I will never stop being an Independent. At this point, I might as well call myself a man without a party: I'm over Obama (have been for a while), but I can't vote for the same party that would put people like this into power, or at least at power's doorstep. I know this guy is just one of many (and there are plenty of whackjobs on the other side, too), but between him and the "family values" prigs, I can't do it.

And while I consider myself pro-choice, it's not like I'm just in love with the concept. "Safe, legal, and rare" is my thing.

AndrewPrice said...

On him stepping down, I guess we'll see. It seems like it would be irrational for him to stay in the race now that everyone is abandoning him. But politicians are often motivated by ego rather than rationality and he may think that because he won the primary, he's entitled to continue. It wouldn't be the first time.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav and Doc, I'm going to side with Doc's position, I think it's great that you feel that way T-Rav and I respect your views, but I can't apply them to government power.

I also see a huge difference between banning abortion as just a means of correcting carelessness and forcing women to carry children that were forced upon them through rape or incest.

To me, forcing a woman to carry a child to term when it's the results of rape is just beyond cruel and I don't want my government having the power to do that. I think that needs to be left up to the individual.

AndrewPrice said...

Tam, This whole thing is rather upsetting from stem to stern. And the problem now is that we could conceivable end up not winning the Senate if things end up really close. This is frustrating and I can't understand how we keep letting people make it so far in the process without anyone raising any red flags? This seems to keep happening to our party.

tryanmax said...

Akin is certainly guilty of bad political judgment, but little more. To that end, he may as well withdraw from the race as it is doubtful he can recover. But does the man deserves excoriation besides? Isn’t it a little disingenuous to lambast a man for having controversial ideas? A lot more has been inferred from his statement than what was actually said. I know only a troglodyte would look deeper into this, but that’s what I’ve done.

Take his use of the word “legitimate.” It is certainly awkward, but who is actually trying to get to the bottom of what he meant? There is lots of speculation, but no one seems to have actually asked him. Most are assuming that he has some backwards idea of what a rape is. The reality is, there are several forms of rape recognized by various disciplines and it is doubtful that anybody agrees with all possible definitions. Of course, that doesn’t preclude the possibility that Akin does have backwards ideas on rape, but that isn’t known.

Then there is the matter of his medical knowledge. Akin is probably familiar with studies such as this one which only seem controversial when applied to topics like sexual assault. Other studies reveal that rape victims experience a higher instance of miscarriage. Incidentally, the doctors that pen these studies probably don’t lose their licenses.

And it’s worth pointing out that Akin had the question put to him. That rather diminishes the accusation that he is sex-obsessed. He also never said that rape cannot result in pregnancy. Quite the contrary. He prefaced the now infamous sentence by acknowledging it as a “particularly tough sort of ethical question.” He also went on to explicitly acknowledge that pregnancy from rape can happen. He gave his honest opinion that the punishment belongs on the rapist rather than the child--hardly an insane mode of reasoning--and he closed by voicing opposition to the morning-after pill, a controversial but not uncommon position to take.

In all, the man hardly sounds like a half-cocked lunatic, though the media certainly is racking up the win in portraying him as such.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

Everything this guy is saying now screams EGO. The Missouri GOP is begging him to step aside. According to his consultants, he will tomorrow. According to his campaign and him, he won't.

What I would love to see, is him getting up to the mike and say, "I am stepping down because of health problems. I have foot in mouth disease. There is no way I can overcome this prior to November. I regret my comments. Thank you."

This way, Todd Akin will still have a career next silly season.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Let's hope his advisor comes up with a good way out of this.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I already knew you would. And yes, forcing the woman to carry the child to term is cruel when she doesn't want it, but to me, ending the child's life for something it had no say in is even crueler. Say what you will, but I'm not being illogical about it.

But as I said to Doc, I'll take what I can get on the abortion issue.

Joel Farnham said...

tryanmax,

Yes, but that is not the way it is portrayed. This election hinges on winning the White House and the Senate as well as keeping the House. This gaffe is damaging to all three.

AndrewPrice said...

Scott, Thanks! Any time Orson Wells applauds for you, it's a good thing!

I agree with you. Statements like the one this guy made make it hard to be a conservative at times too. And then having idiots like the FRC who don't even see the problem with this even at this late date when everyone else is abandoning him make it difficult. It is hard to defend indefensible allies.

And I have no doubt that this is the very attitude which keeps that huge chunk of conservative moderates from becoming conservatives. Conservatives need to clean their ranks of the misogynists just like they did with the racists because there aren't very many people like this, but they keep tarring the entire party.

T-Rav said...

I have to duck out for a couple hours. Be back as soon as I can.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, I can't agree. This statement, on its face, is evidence of someone who doesn't think rape is a serious crime. This has all the classic hallmarks of someone with odious views who is trying to explain them in a way that doesn't let on what he really believes -- this is part for the course for many religious right figures -- and he lacked the judgment to keep his views sufficiently vague. This is like people who claim they aren't racists but then tell you that studies show that black are inferior.

This isn't a gaffe, this is a freudian slip and it shows that he's not someone we should trust with decision making power.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, It screams of ego to me too. He knows this is an unforgivable comment -- he will lose the election. To continue only invites defeat. And since everyone in the GOP is now cutting him off and demanding his resignation, there is no realistic choice but to quit. If he doesn't, it can't be anything but ego.

But then, we've seen this all the time in the past with other politicians who got themselves into trouble but decided they could squeak it out and then people would forget.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I can respect that, I just don't share that view and I don't think it's the government's place to decide which of us is right.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Ultimately, this is about winning the election and this hurts us in the Senate and in the race for the White House because he played right into the War on Women meme.

K said...

Akins resigns his candidacy.

1 million bucks in Democratic money invested in his campaign down the drain.

AndrewPrice said...

K, Yeah, the Democrats would be pretty upset if he resigned. But the last I saw (15 minutes ago) he still said he's in the race to win it and he's hoping people forgive him.

Joel Farnham said...

And the fall-out from Akin continues, Elizabeth Warren is now playing the rape card on Scott Brown. By the end of the week, I expect Obama's campaign to play the rape card on Romney. Obama has already had a press conference to officially despise Akin's comments.

Anyone left who is willing to back Akin up should actually look at the numbers of crossover votes during the primary. Most were Democrats for Akin. A little action that helped him defeat the other two candidates.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I didn't know that about the crossover votes. I did know that McCaskill tried to make him seem like "the worst" choice for conservatives, which probably means she wanted to run against him.

In terms of the rape card, it's already being played by the MSM all over the place. They went after Ryan earlier, they are pushing the war on women meme, and then Obama's press conference. This isn't going to end until he resign and the Democrats will try to use this to tar everyone else.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

I see that, but it will only stick if he stays candidate past 5 pm tomorrow.

If he doesn't resign now, it will take a court order prior to Sept 25 to resign, otherwise we are stuck with him. And we are not talking about a court order to make him quit. It will take a court order to remove him from the ballot should he quit after tomorrow.

I don't see any way he can win now.

AndrewPrice said...

Here is National Review's take on this, it's well said actually:

Representative Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for senator from Missouri, became nationally notorious yesterday for saying something stupid. In the course of explaining why he believes abortion should be illegal even when pregnancies result from rape, he said that in cases of “legitimate rape” the victim’s body has defense mechanisms that usually prevent pregnancy.

Give the man points for concision, at least: His remarks combined several mistakes with brutal efficiency. There is no evidence for Akin’s biological claim. The frequency with which rape results in pregnancy has no bearing on whether abortion should be allowed when it does. And while it is not completely clear what point Akin was trying to make with the phrase, “legitimate rape” should not appear in any good one.

Only a small minority of Americans opposes abortion in cases of rape, and some Democrats are now trying to claim that the real scandal in Akin’s remarks is that he, and some other Republicans, belongs to it. For the very same reason this issue offers Democrats a political opportunity, however, it is only a theoretical one: No state is going to ban abortion in the case of rape even ifRoe v. Wade is overruled — and even if Akin were elected to the Senate. Everyone knows this. (In contrast, Obama’s minority position on abortion — that infants who survive abortion should have no legal protection if they are at an early stage of development — led him to fight an actual change in the law.)

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I see no way he can win either. And I think the GOP will be all but required to run a write-in candidate if he continues, which ensures he will lose even if he could otherwise somehow have pulled it out.

You are right, if he resigns before the deadline and is replaced, all the Democratic effort to make this a GOP/conservative issue will fall apart. In fact, the contrary, it will probably play well with women and moderates that the GOP forced him out.

tryanmax said...

Andrew, I'm afraid, short of an explanation unlikely to come, we just read the same statement differently. I see a lot of inference into the word "legitimate" which is amplified by the fact that the media is trying to tie the entire GOP to it. I find it on par with Romney's "severe" conservatism. I don't dispute his views on abortion following rape are in the great minority, but it simply doesn't follow that he also doesn't think rape is a serious crime.

For my part, I must admit that I cannot agree with every single definition of rape. That doesn't mean I regard the crime any less seriously, only that I find certain interpretations of the word diminish the concept.

NightcrawlerER said...

Is it true what Coulter said that the Democrats spent $2million to push Akin in the primary?

tryanmax said...

Joel, I recognize how the quote is being portrayed, which is why I say he may as well step aside now. But that doesn't make me ready to lambast him as a backwards misogynistic imbecile when I have no way of knowing about that. Rape is one of those things you're supposed to nod and agree how terrible it is, but you're not supposed to actually think about the meaning of the word, let alone discuss it. That's an error Akin obviously made.

Individualist said...

Scyfiterry and Andrew

The way I see it a fetus is a person with rights or it is not. If we can make a decision to kill it for one reason how can we logically assume that one can't kill it for other reasons.

The child is innocent and sorry I can't justify killing it. And that is what we would be doing. It is alive and human.

I understand how horrible it is but it is not my forcing anyone to do anything by not performing a procedure. The way I look at it my agreement to allow the procedure to be performed makes me as liable as the doctor that does it. I can't give that agreement. I can't. I am not going to stop the abortions but I won't give it my approval.

The woman having to bring the child to term is sick but so is killing an innocent child. Murder is a capital offence Rape is not. I am going with murder being the greater wrong.


AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, I simply don't see a reasonable explanation for this quote. Nor has he offered one.

AndrewPrice said...

nightcrawler, I haven't paid attention to that, so I'm not sure what was spent on what, but I do recall T-Rav saying that McCaskill targeted him the primaries for her ads.

Joel Farnham said...

tryanmax,

It is bad enough the way he said it. I got from him that there is some magical sperm killer secreted (that is discharged) by rape victims that he knows about. Now, it could be true, I am not saying it isn't. How it has escaped detection is a great mystery. Maybe you know about it? Until it is produced and proven that this sperm killer exists, I am going with misogynistic a$$hole who has never ever dealt with a rape victim.

AndrewPrice said...

Indi, That's false reasoning. If you use the government to ban something from happening then you are actively participating same way as if you stood there with a gun to someone's head. You can't hide behind the idea that withholding your approval is somehow not acting.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Unless you are talking about a false allegation, rape is rape and it doesn't come in gradients of bad.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I agree. You really can't separate out his words and look at them one at a time to make them seem not so bad. When you look at his entire statement, he is suggesting that only some rapes are legitimate and those rapes rarely result in pregnancy because of some magical process no one knows anything about. That sounds to me exactly like some crap he read in some fringe pamphlet that tried to explain why rape isn't really such a bad thing.

ellenB said...

Individualist, What makes you think that it's your place to "approve" of someone else's actions? Who gave you that right? Does that mean I get to make decision about your life?

Joel Farnham said...

Oh, this is interesting, Claire McCaskill is chiming in that the Republicans trying to push Akin out of the race are too radical. This of course is after she spent 1.5 million advertising that Akin is too conservative during the primary.

I think she is desperate to have Akin as her opponent. I think she knew that he was this radical prior to the primary. It just is that it is too soon for him to blow up his candidacy. I think they counted on him blowing up his race later. If Akin leaves now, she will have to face someone who won't self-destruct. Whupsie.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That is fascinating. Clearly, she wants to keep him in the race because she thinks he's a liability. Based on this statement, I'd say he is. BUT they couldn't have counted on him saying any of this, so I wonder what they have on him or what they are expecting from him that is still to come? I never heard anything unusual during the primary.

Patriot said...

Compare this to the uproar when Obama pushed a bill allowing live birth abortions while a IL state senator..........crickets.....crickets........chirp

Or the leftist "bio-ethicist" Prof. Singer at Princeton who believes a woman should have a certain number of days after the brith of her child to determine if she wants to keep it or not. Why do we not condemn these evil positions while we all shudder in horror at what some ass clown thinks about rape?

A pox on all these a-holes.

AndrewPrice said...

Patriot, I don't know about the Obama bill specifically, but the whole partial birth abortion thing swept the country with outrage and probably wiped out a lot of support for abortion.

In terms of the bioethicist, I covered that when it was said by an Italian professor and people here (and in the British press) were pretty outraged.

BevfromNYC said...

I just occurred to me I have a good friend of my Mothers is a Missouri delegate to the Republican Convention next week. I emailed her to see if she can give me any local scuttlebutt on what's happening with Akin from the inside. I will let you know, if I get a response.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Bev! That could be interesting, especially if he doesn't resign.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Akin is a scumbag. Good riddance to bad rubbish I say!

I agree with T-Rav and Indy that even a child conceived by rape is a human being that hopefully will get a chance at life (my wife had a child that way (as a teenager) before she met me and she had the baby and gave her up for adoption).

However, I wouldn't want the state to have the power to force women to carry those babies to term.
It should be up to them, and hopefully, adoption is something they would consider.

Akin needs to resign, now.

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, I can agree with that. To me, the issue is that the state should not be forcing this. If a woman wants the child or wants to give it up for adoption, that's great. But I don't want to see the state telling women they need to carry this child.

And we'll see if it's good riddance or not. So far, no word.

Anthony said...

Well, I think it's safe to say the Democrats have gotten us back for Alvin Greene.

AndrewPrice said...

Anthony, LOL! Well done! They have indeed.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Having said that, Obama and those who support his views are bigger scumbags than Akin for pushing late term abortions and abortions for convenience.
That's far worse, IMO, but the media don't call them out on it.

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, I can't disagree with that either.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, she did, although I didn't give it much thought at the time because she ran attack ads against the other two as well.

I don't believe she had any grand strategy going here because a, I don't give her credit for that much intelligence, and b, Akin's problems are all internal. I've had a nervous feeling the past week or so, seeing the barrage of Dem attack ads, but that's not from the ads themselves but from the impression that his people weren't doing a lot to counter them. The district he represents is a fairly safe one (mix of suburbs, rural, exurbs), and he's never had to fight hard like this. I wonder if that doesn't have something to do with it. And then this--you could maybe get away with saying that in his neck of the woods, although I doubt even that, but obviously not on the statewide level. I don't think he's used to such a high-intensity campaign, and that's more to blame than anything.

Jen said...

I don't really have anything much to add. I've evolved in my position of abortion over the years (for the most part, pro-choice in my 20s), and still somewhat lean towards rape/incest as a reason to terminate a pregnancy, but after reading the comments, I can still always change my mind. I'm not locked into any one particular way of thought.

I also realize that a human life is a human life, and find partial birth/late term abortion, or allowing a fetus to die because of a botched abortion under any circumstances appalling. I also don't agree with abortion because someone was just careless. Try keeping your clothes on.

This whole subject is a little sensitive to me (I have never been raped, or pregnant), because of people I know who have had things happen to them.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I think it's clear why she wants to keep him as her opponent now.

But in terms of why she may have wanted him before, it's probably what you say -- unless there is something bizarre in his voting record. I would have assumed the other two candidates were pretty close in terms of what they were promising, so I can't see anything he advocates as a huge problem... and she had no way to know he would say this.

So maybe she just thought he would be the least practiced? I'm not sure.

In any event, she's breaking one of the big rules of politics -- when your opponent is imploding, let him. She should be very careful about getting involved until this resolves itself.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

One major difference between republicans and democrats, in light of the Akin idiocy:

We always try to get rid of our idiots, whereas democrats don't.

Barney Frank? A host of scandals. Still there.

Jon Corzine? Highway robbery. No prosecution.

Eric Holder. Fast n' Furious and a lot of other scandals. Still There.

Chris Dodd, Charlie Rangel, Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Jane Harman, John Murtha (before he died), Ted Kennedy (before he died), John Edwards, Bill Clinton, etc., etc.

The democrats always circle the wagons, even after hard evidence shows their representatives are guilty of crimes and scandals.
Heck, often, even after they are convicted, if they don't rat anyone else out they are welcomed with open arms.

I think that says a lot about how the two parties react when one of their own says something stupid and wrong, or is involved in a scandal or crime.

Republicans and conservatives are reacting correctly in condemning Akins for what he said.

However, sometimes the republicans go overboard, like they did with Herman Cain.

Very few democrats ever condemn fellow democrats when they are in the wrong.

AndrewPrice said...

Jen, This is one of those issues frankly that people who have not dealt with it should not be talking about. It's just too easy to make absolute statements when you have no clue what you're talking about.

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, I concur. You make a great point and this is something that truly is commendable about our side and despicable about theirs. When one of ours does something wrong, we tend to get rid of them. When one of theirs does something wrong, they promote them to leadership.

It's amazing how often the Democrats can overlook serious scandals just to keep their people in place. I think that's fostered the culture of corruption which besets their side and has made them all into nasty hypocrites.

Our side isn't perfect, but we at least do our best to work on it!

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

This is an unforced error. Bear with me.

All abortion, except for rape or incest, should be banned.

This has been, for the most part, a Republican position. Standard answer.

How do you get from that to this?

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

I am pretty sure, Akin has held this belief for most of his life and as a Representative could easily be re-elected. Robert Byrd was, and he was far more out there than Akin. I think this is what McCaskill knew of her opponent. The problem is the timing. If the media waited two days to get it out, we would be in worse shape. As it is, we have one chance to kill this meme dead.

The real problem is Akin. I think he seriously believes he was mistaken for only ONE word, legitimate, and not for the whole quote. If you listened to Hannity's Radio program, this guy doesn't think he said any thing bad except for ONE WORD.

I just hope that someone Akin respects, tells him it is OVER.

T-Rav said...

Joel, I think Akin is the poster boy for why politics and religion often don't mix well. Based on some of the comments I've heard from him, I think that, like many politicians from this neck of the woods, he has convinced himself that it is, conveniently, God's will he should become Senator, and if he believes that it's going to take a thunderbolt to change his mind. I worry that all the denunciations and threats may be perceived by him as a challenge and an obstacle the Lord will just have to help him overcome. That's the tone I'm starting to get from him.

I may call his people tomorrow morning. I have too much invested in McCaskill's defeat not to express myself.

tryanmax said...

Andrew, Akin has offered explanation but it's too late to be worth anything. And don't get me wrong, I think this scenario with him having to step down and be replaced with somebody better is a net boon for the party. I just don't see the benefit of taking up the Democrat talking point that this guy is a closet misogynist.

As far as definitions of rape, I pretty much do mean false allegations, but I also have an eye on some non-legal definitions, especially of the ultra-feminist variety. So long as there is disagreement as to what rape means, "rape is rape" is a fairly meaningless turn of phrase.

Joel Farnham said...

T-Rav,

It isn't religion. It is hubris.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I think that is the problem -- he doesn't understand why this is so wrong or why people are upset. He thinks it was just a misused word and it never occurs to him that the whole thought attached to it is wrong.

My guess is that he's probably said the same thing in many conversations with like minded people and they all agreed that he was right. They probably even read the same information which proved that the rape victim should be happy about "the gift" of pregnancy... yes, I've seen people write crap like that. But since Reps really do run in very small worlds and usually are only noticed by political insiders, no one has ever called him on this.

Now that he's running statewide and he's outside his bubble, it probably came as a real shock to him that anyone would be upset by this.

I saw the same thing in VA where these people lived in a bubble and never met anyone who wasn't part of the same ideological cult. They were fine as long as they never got noticed by anyone outside the bubble, but once they did, they would implode because they were simply unprepared for people who didn't buy the same theories. (And this held true with moderates and conservatives.)

I think you are right that the Republican position is basically banning abortion except in the case of rape, incest, life of the mother. Not that everyone agrees with that, but that's pretty much the position the party keeps taking. So maybe McCaskill thought she could make something of his stance on abortion in the case of rape? Or maybe she just realized he was the least savvy.

Either way, the MSM is working over time to connect Akin to Ryan (who has a similar position on rape-abortion) with the idea of making the party sound more extreme than it really is.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, You raise an excellent point, though I don't entirely lay the substance of the problem on religion -- more the form. The substance of the problem is hubris. If Akin was an atheist, he would probably still be going through the same process about how the country needs HIM, and how all the opposition is just people who know how important HE is and want to stop HIM.

But since he's deeply religious, this hubris/insanity will likely morph into the idea that God has chosen him. And you're right that he will see the attacks as God challenging him, which unfortunately may make him less likely to face reality.

So while I agree that he is likely to see this as an issue involving God, I think the truth is that it's only the form that is the result of his religious beliefs, i.e. if he wasn't religious, he would just use different delusions to reach the same point.

And that all assumes he doesn't ultimately do the right thing, which he might.

tryanmax said...

Joel, I continue to disagree. What Akin said is so incredibly vague, it's a stretch to call it unscientific in the first place. I already linked to a scientific article that might seem to support Akin's statement, mainly because the statement is so vague. Politics mesh with science almost as well as they do with religion, and frankly, the people saying the man's science is wrong are wrong can only say that from a political perspective.

Joel Farnham said...

tryanmax,

If you are talking about "all sex is rape" allegation from the Feminazis, yep, I agree.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, I think this will ultimately benefit the party if they can get him out of there and still win the seat. That could ultimately be very good indeed. It would completely neuter the Democratic push that women can't trust Republicans.

I'm not worried about the ultra-feminist definitions because they aren't accepted. Neither the law nor the public accept those as rape. Rape is by definition forcing oneself sexually upon another. Anything in that category is rape.

Joel Farnham said...

tryanmax,

If you have never been around a woman who has been raped, you would never know just how close you can get to having your testicles cut off by citing a scientific article on rape.

Science has nothing to do with rape, just ask a rape victim or their families.

Keep it up, just never mention it to any woman who might sleep in your house.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, The study you point to says nothing about women being able to do this consciously or even subconsciously. It is all about the compatibility of sperms with certain traits and females with certain traits. For this to matter to rape victims would require that all rapists have low-signal sperms and all rape victims have these apparently "highly choosey" bodies.

tryanmax said...

Joel, and yet one of the criticisms of Akin's remark is that the science is bad. I'm only responding to the claim in kind. No fair changing the field of play and then calling me out-of-bounds! :) I really don't care to get into personal experiences with rape. Let's just say that I've had them.

Andrew, I only post the link in response to the idea that Akin is completely off his nut. That his idea does not come from a vacuum is my only point.

Just as an exercise, try this on for size: cobbling the data together would appear to show that the instance of pregnancy resulting from rape is higher than the baseline, that is, instances of pregnancy resulting from unprotected sex in general. Due to lack of data, this comparison must assume that all rape victims are fertile and none are on any form of birth control.

At first blush this would appear to make Akin woefully wrong. However, the notion that rape so enhances human fecundity doesn't exactly pass the smell test, at least from an anthropological point of view. I think it far more likely that the data on both subjects is inadequate to draw conclusions from.

T-Rav said...

I'm not going to even pretend to know anything about rape and pregnancy. I think it is a plausible suggestion that in the course of the rape, the emotional trauma generated might prevent a successful conception from occurring (as if you can even call that an "upside"). But what, if any, science is behind that, I haven't a clue. And there's a study out there saying that a rape is in fact slightly more likely--about five percent of the time--to result in a pregnancy than consensual sex. And I don't know anything about that either.

T-Rav said...

Oh, and even if I did know more about it, I wouldn't dare go around telling it to women. I've been stitched up once, and I don't care to do it again.

K said...

Assuming Akin stays, I don't think anyone has yet proposed another angle.

Many moons ago, when new left radical Tom Hayden was running for office the first time, his opponent's campaign manager suddenly quit near the end of the race, claiming that his boss was an evil underhanded dirty politician. Naturally, Hayden won - even though he was radical who publicly proposed overthrowing the US government. Obviously the campaign manager was a mole for Hayden who had been paid off.

In 1995, Willie Brown maintained control of the California State assembly by getting a couple of Republicans to defect to the Democrats.

Now Akin, after getting a million bucks of campaign help from the Democrats, self destructs while just coincidentally doing so right on the "War on Women" target that's formed the main theme of the Obama campaign. Damaging both his prospects but also the Republican's chances in the national race.

Question: Is Akin just a boob whom the Democrats pushed out for the gullible MO religious voters and has self destructed as expected, or is he a mole whose been paid off to scuttle the likelihood of Obamacare repeal?

The monetary and political potential for skullduggery here is colossal. Soros et al, the drug companies, the unions, the education-government complex have huge vested interests in keeping Obamacare or at least jamming the congress so that Obama's "legacy" remains. It's happened in the past, and it may well be happening now.

Individualist said...

Andrew

The government imposes the same ban on murdering someone who is born. If it is false reasoning to assume the govenrment does not have that right then it is false reasoning to mmake murder a crime.

Fact of the matter is one has to perfrom an act in order to have an abortion, That act is murder. It is as immoral to allow abortion as it is to allow murder.

I understand the reasoning behind wanting to allow the abortion. I would not really blame the woman for feeling that way at all. I just can't acquiese to approval of it. If I have a vote in the matter I'd have to vote no. Otherwise I am as liable as the doctor that performs an abortion.

That is not faulty reasoning it is a value judgment. A judgment that life is sacred and I have a duty to protect it. If there is a reason that an innocent can be killed because it was the unfortunate progeny of a corrupt and evil father then there can be reasons that any innocent can be killed. You just have to be clever enough to convince everyone else.

Either the child is a person with rights or it is not. Either way it is innocent. Sorry but it is how I feel.

Individualist said...

Ellen

Des that make you have the right to approve of my life decisions?

Absolutely, if I wish to murder someone you can have the state stope me or incarcerate me.

If I choose to steal from someone then you have the right to have the state arrest me.


Before you tell me that is not the same I can give you the same emotionally charged argument. A man's wife is raped and she conceives a child. The man then goes out and kills and tortures the rapist. by the same logic this is OK since the man was evil. Even more so because that man is not innocent. So do we allow the vigalante murder of rapists.? If not, why not? Certainly murdering the rapist in cold blood is a less evil act than murdering the innocent child.

Yet I am told the rapist has a right to his life and the child does not. Why is that the "sensible" position.

T-Rav said...

I just called Akin's office in STL and then DC to yell at the staff that he should resign. No one was answering at either place. That could mean everyone's too swamped to take calls, or that he's tuning all the naysayers out. If that's the case, my rage dial will officially be turned up to an 11.

AndrewPrice said...

K, That's an interesting question. I strongly doubt it, but I can't rule it out. You never know in politics.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Best of luck reaching him. He's apparently airing a commercial asking for forgiveness, so I don't think he's quitting.

Joel Farnham said...

Akin has until five today. I know about those ads. They were bought yesterday and today he thinks he will be forgiven. He might still be the candidate, but he won't be Senator. God and Democrats have seen to that. God wouldn't want such an idiot as a Republican Senator. He is not that cruel. Cruel to Akin, but then again he is a misogynistic a$$hole. No, I am talking about being cruel to us.

I think he will quit, but maybe not today. Phone calls aren't being returned that normally are returned. Places to hold press conferences, normally found and set up by staff sometimes borrowed from Republican Headquarters aren't going to be available. He and his little coterie of sycophants will do there best, but he is done for. I don't think the Republican Party can afford to hang on to this guy.

So, either Todd Akin does the right thing and step down, or two weeks later he caves because he lost all support. We lose Missouri Senate race, but we still won't have lost the Presidency and the Senate. I do see the Tea Party voting against this guy, just not the top of the ticket.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I think he won't resign. I think he will hold on the bitter end actually because someone who is willing to ignore near 100% calls for his resignation isn't going to change his mind in a few weeks.

That said, I think the Republicans needs to start organizing a write-in candidate and throw all their support behind them. It will be a long shot to win, but they need to put distance between themselves and Akin.

And I agree that the Tea Party won't stick with him. They've become much savvier lately about not backing people who are dead ends.

Joel Farnham said...

Andrew,

I think write-ins are all well and good, but I want to see if there is a Libertarian in the race right now. If so, it wouldn't hurt the Republicans and the Tea Partiers to back the long shot Libertarian. Just a thought.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That might be a good idea too. But in either event, I think it's important for the party to distance themselves from him, especially now that they've all called for his resignation.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I didn't get through (big shocker), but I did send him a letter online. Since I don't live in his Congressional district, I have no idea if it will be read or not, but in any case, I blasted away at him for all I was worth.

Incidentally, I see up in the sidebar there's a link saying Akin and McCaskill are still essentially tied in their race. Don't believe it. That's from PPP, I already checked out the partisan breakdown, and they severely oversampled Republicans to get that result. I wonder why.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, That is fascinating! Talk about major proof that PPP is partisan! They normally way oversample Democrats, but this time when it fits the narrative, they oversample Republicans. Amazing! No integrity at all.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, tell me about it. I can count the times PPP has oversampled Republicans on one hand and still have room to spare, and I don't think any of them have worked out well for us. But I would lay ten-to-one odds Akin is waving this around at headquarters as proof he can still win.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I would expect he is too. He'll see this as proof of a "silent majority" who believe in him. Politicians always believe that.

Writer X said...

Andrew, I agree with you completely that this guy should resign. It's an outrageous, buffoon-worthy comment, something that we hear regularly from Democrats.

My only quibble: If Akin were a Democrat, all the usual suspects (Pelosi, Blabbermouth Schultz, Carney, Axelrod,etc.) would be circling the wagons and saying Akin's comment was "taken out of context" or "he had good intentions, but..." or the Biden favorite, "he was just tired, didn't know what he was saying..."

AndrewPrice said...

Writer X, I agree. I think it's important to remind people that the Democrats don't get rid of their problem-children, they promote them. We do the right thing... are try.

T-Rav said...

I'm hearing a lot of chatter from people right now about "if we demand Akin step down, we are saying the choice of Missouri voters should be overridden by a party committee." I can understand that point of view. At the same time, I say @#$% that. A political party is not a democracy. And having voted for him, I will happily allow my vote to be overridden if it means beating McCaskill.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Yeah, I don't buy that either. The system allows people to be replaced because they implode. It's not overriding the choice of voters to use those mechanisms.

This is a critical election which could well decide the Senate and the Republicans can't just sit back and hope this all works out.

Individualist said...

United States Senate
US Senate
Jonathan Dine
5116 NW Kalivas Dr APT 62
Riverside MO 64150
816-612-3519

Missouri Senate Candidate Libertarian Party

K said...

Anyone think the Republicans in MO should go back to closed primaries? Not such a good idea to let Democrats pick your candidate, is it?

AndrewPrice said...

K, I think all primaries should be closed for a lot of reasons. People who won't join the party should not be allowed to pick the party's representatives.

Post a Comment