More GOP candidates trying to destroy the party's national respectability

**Gehringer_2** · 08-19-2012, 08:21 PM

This has to be embarrassing for Rick Snyder, Colin Powell, Geroge Schultz, Richard Lugar, even 'W' and any number of other sane Republicans.

Candidate's Comments on Rape Draw Criticism - NYTimes.com

How do they keep putting these Neanderthals up for public office?

And no Mr Akin, you did not misspeak. To misspeak is to speak in such a way as to leave your hearers misunderstanding what you meant. No Mr.Akin - you Sir said exactly what you meant, and by it made perfectly clear that you are a person of astounding ignorance.

**Deleterious** · 08-19-2012, 08:59 PM

What a stupid thread title.

**Oblong** · 08-19-2012, 09:26 PM

Sounds like he'd fit in perfectly as a host on The View, or perhaps a position out in Hollywood.

**ROMAD1** · 08-19-2012, 10:29 PM

not hearing any apologies from the Administration re: Biden. Letting this slide.

**pyrotigers** · 08-19-2012, 11:28 PM

Well, I didn't think anyone would outstupid Joe Biden this month, but this guy did it. Congratulations Mr. Akin, you should probably never speak again.

**monkeynuts** · 08-19-2012, 11:32 PM

This might help propel Ryan's extreme views on abortion into the forefront...which likely won't settle well with women/independents.

**Mr. DNA** · 08-20-2012, 04:53 AM

He's not the first Republican to advance this idea that raped women can't get pregnant:

Freind's Rape-pregnancy Theory Refuted - Philly.com

Here's a choice quote from this elected Republican moron from Pennsylavania from 1988:

HARRISBURG — The odds that a woman who is raped will get pregnant are "one in millions and millions and millions," said state Rep. Stephen Freind, R-Delaware County, the Legislature's leading abortion foe.

The reason, Freind said, is that the traumatic experience of rape causes a woman to "secrete a certain secretion" that tends to kill sperm.

Two Philadelphia doctors specializing in human reproduction characterized Freind's contention as scientifically baseless.

Attempting to downplay the number of pregnancies caused by rape or minimize the suffering of women who've been raped is hardly out of the ordinary among the Bubba Mujahideen in flyover country. Here's Mullah "Bill Napoli" Omar (R-SD) expressing some typically enlightened views on this same subject from last year:

South Dakota Law Bans Most Types of Abortion | PBS NewsHour | March 3, 2006 | PBS

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Napoli says most abortions are performed for what he calls "convenience." He insists that exceptions can be made for rape or incest under the provision that protects the mother's life. I asked him for a scenario in which an exception may be invoked.

BILL NAPOLI: A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.

According to Ayatollah Bill Napoli (R-SD), only a "sodomized virgin" who was diligent in attending local church services could truly be worthy of the "except in cases of rape" loophole.

What's really creepy is that lots of dudes who have more enlightened views on the subject are willing to get into bed politically with Hee-Haw Hezbollah and the Tammy Faye Taliban because they're the glue that holds together the political cover for all the insane defense contractor payola, Wall Street shenanigans, wrecking the environment for profit, etc. Must feel kinda gross.

**Boilerfan** · 08-20-2012, 08:34 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/us...ment.html?_r=1

If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.

There is just so much wrong with what he said. First "legitimate rape?" Can someone explain that?

Second- How does this work? Is there a switch that puts a protective barrier around the egg? What doctor would tell him this?

And yes this does connect to Romney/Ryan. Paul Ryan co-sponsored a bill that with this man that would have redefined what rape is.

This is what happens when the anti-intellectuals start to control the party's primary elections.

**Boilerfan** · 08-20-2012, 08:39 AM

sorry I missed the other thread. move or delete

**Melody** · 08-20-2012, 09:39 AM

Got to admit, that was a really ignorant statement.

Still not seeing what it has to do with Ryan. Co-sponsoring a bill doesn't mean much.

**mtutiger** · 08-20-2012, 10:06 AM

What a moronic statement...

**chasfh** · 08-20-2012, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by Melody

Got to admit, that was a really ignorant statement.

Still not seeing what it has to do with Ryan. Co-sponsoring a bill doesn't mean much.

Would you please explain this one?

**Melody** · 08-20-2012, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by chasfh

Would you please explain this one?

The fact that two people co sponsored a bill doesn't mean anything beyond having come to agreement on the contents of the bill.

**chasfh** · 08-20-2012, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Melody

The fact that two people co sponsored a bill doesn't mean anything beyond having come to agreement on the contents of the bill.

Thats probably true, but I also think people who believe these two guys are of like minds on abortion, given all the available information out there about them, aren't coming out of left field on it. Smoke fire and all that.

**mtutiger** · 08-20-2012, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by Melody

The fact that two people co sponsored a bill doesn't mean anything beyond having come to agreement on the contents of the bill.

Right... does that mean that conservative outrage over Barney Frank's cosponsorship of Dodd-Frank is overblown too?

Sorry, but I don't agree that cosponsorship "doesn't mean much..."

**pyrotigers** · 08-20-2012, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by monkeynuts

This might help propel Ryan's extreme views on abortion into the forefront...which likely won't settle well with women/independents.

Romney and Ryan immediately released a statement saying they believe abortion should be legal in cases of rape/incest/etc and that this guy is a moron basically.

I think to us Ryan's views on abortion are going to be extreme, but to the American public they're probably fine. It's pretty clear that abortion will never actually be made illegal, so being against it is really just pandering for votes with the religious right at this point imo

**Oblong** · 08-20-2012, 12:51 PM

Are they going to pull a Lautenberg and try to get this guy off the GOP ballot?

**monkeynuts** · 08-20-2012, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by pyrotigers

Romney and Ryan immediately released a statement saying they believe abortion should be legal in cases of rape/incest/etc and that this guy is a moron basically.

I think to us Ryan's views on abortion are going to be extreme, but to the American public they're probably fine. It's pretty clear that abortion will never actually be made illegal, so being against it is really just pandering for votes with the religious right at this point imo

I just looked at a Gallup poll (just one poll - feel free to add others) that shows that 75% think abortion should be legal - and 22% think it should be illegal - in the case of rape or incest. I don't think the public would be fine with Ryan's views based on the polling.

Abortion

I do agree with you that I highly doubt abortion will be illegal, but I don't take much into Romney/Ryan immediately releasing that statement - the fact is that Ryan is a heartbeat away from the presidency and we know what his thoughts on the issue are. That's actually a bigger debate though...I think a VP's personal beliefs on something are very important even if when nominated they officially adopt the presidential candidate's platform.

**Melody** · 08-20-2012, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by pyrotigers

Romney and Ryan immediately released a statement saying they believe abortion should be legal in cases of rape/incest/etc and that this guy is a moron basically.

And this is the view of abortion held by over half of Americans. The hard line pro choice and pro life wings are both minority views.

**monkeynuts** · 08-20-2012, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by Oblong

Are they going to pull a Lautenberg and try to get this guy off the GOP ballot?

I read earlier he would legally have to be replaced by tomorrow (Tuesday). The problem I guess is this guy is kind of out there with no big backing of the GOP...his son is his campaign manager and wife his primary advisor. He has not taken advice from campaign veterans over the last few months and it's unlikely he'll cave to them today/tomorrow and opt out.

**sinister porpoise** · 08-20-2012, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by Mr. DNA

He's not the first Republican to advance this idea that raped women can't get pregnant:

Freind's Rape-pregnancy Theory Refuted - Philly.com

Here's a choice quote from this elected Republican moron from Pennsylavania from 1988[..]

Couple more instances of the idea here. Physicians for Life, and this guy:

In 1998, Fay Boozman, a Republican candidate for Senate in Arkansas, got in trouble for embracing this idea. The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported that Boozman said the inability to get pregnant from rape stemmed from "God's little protective shield"—a report Boozman denied before saying that it was in fact an "adrenaline rush" that prevented conception from rape.

**Truth** · 08-20-2012, 01:07 PM

Originally Posted by Boilerfan

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/us...ment.html?_r=1

This is what happens when the anti-intellectuals start to control the party's primary elections.

No doubt it was an idiotic statement but to suggest that one party has a monopoly on anti- intellectualism is to not follow other races or Congress in action.

**Oblong** · 08-20-2012, 01:08 PM

I have never ever heard this theory before.... odd. Didn't this guy see Braveheart?

**monkeynuts** · 08-20-2012, 01:20 PM

I am curious about what Akin defines as an "illegitimate rape".

Anywho, I do think think it is funny that during the Republican primary season McCaskill knew she was in a load of trouble. Her campaign realized that the only real shot they had was if this far-right extremist won the nomination...they'd be able to hammer away at his social beliefs. They actually ran a bunch of ads SUPPORTING him during the primaries hoping he'd be the nominee. We'll see how it all works out, but that could've been a brilliant political play.

**Melody** · 08-20-2012, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by monkeynuts

Anywho, I do think think it is funny that during the Republican primary season McCaskill knew she was in a load of trouble. Her campaign realized that the only real shot they had was if this far-right extremist won the nomination...they'd be able to hammer away at his social beliefs. They actually ran a bunch of ads SUPPORTING him during the primaries hoping he'd be the nominee. We'll see how it all works out, but that could've been a brilliant political play.

Wow. Don't think she can give much claim to "respectability," either in that case.

**sinister porpoise** · 08-20-2012, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by pyrotigers

Romney and Ryan immediately released a statement saying they believe abortion should be legal in cases of rape/incest/etc and that this guy is a moron basically.

I think to us Ryan's views on abortion are going to be extreme, but to the American public they're probably fine. It's pretty clear that abortion will never actually be made illegal, so being against it is really just pandering for votes with the religious right at this point imo

What do Romney and Ryan believe regarding abortion? I found this link which, as one piece of information, includes a video of Romney in 2007 saying he'd be "delighted" to sign a bill banning all abortions in America.

I suppose he could be saying
a) I do not have a principled position on abortion. I'll go along with what is popular at the moment. OR
b) I believe abortion should be banned in all circumstances but am constrained by electoral politics from saying so.

**Oblong** · 08-20-2012, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by monkeynuts

I am curious about what Akin defines as an "illegitimate rape".

.

Without having a clue as to what's in the guy's mind, perhaps he was trying to distinguish between forcible rape vs. statutory rape? Or date rape. IN other words, the kind where the victim is not makin an effort to stop it or is trying to consent, but as we know, not everybody can legally consent....

or as Whoopie says the kind that's "not rape rape".

When I first saw links to the headline, without reading the details, just references to "Illegitimate rape", that is what popped in my head, he' talking about forcible rape vs. statutory.

**Lousluggage** · 08-20-2012, 03:19 PM

I suspect that he meant 'legitimate rape' as being the case in which the woman is not lying about being raped.

That aside... what bothers me most is that not only does he appear to believe that a woman who is raped is protected from getting pregnant (even though he says he knows it's possible in a later statement), but that he says that he was led to believe that from what doctors told him. If there are indeed doctors that believe this then we need to know who they are so that people will know to avoid going to them for any reason.

I don't expect all representatives to understand the most difficult theories in science, but this is basic biology.

**Lousluggage** · 08-20-2012, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Melody

Wow. Don't think she can give much claim to "respectability," either in that case.

I agree.

**Euphdude** · 08-20-2012, 03:22 PM

I believe Akin means that God will prevent the fertilization of the female's egg in cases of illegitimate rape, or something to that effect.

**Gehringer_2** · 08-20-2012, 07:41 PM

GOP doing it's best to put an end to Akin's candidacy. Good for them.

National GOP pulls funding from Todd Akin’s Missouri race - The Washington Post

**Mr. DNA** · 08-21-2012, 02:47 AM

I think this sums it up nicely:

**chasfh** · 08-21-2012, 09:41 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/us...e-remarks.html

Anyone still letting this slide?

**Oblong** · 08-21-2012, 09:52 AM

Yes, Claire McCaskill. Looks like the only two people on the planet who want him to stay in are Akin and McCaskill.

Sorry but I won't stand for lectures from the party of the Kennedys and Clintons about rape and it's definitions.

**mtutiger** · 08-21-2012, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by chasfh

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/us...e-remarks.html

Anyone still letting this slide?

The more conservative posters jumped the gun prior to the talking points being released....

**mtutiger** · 08-21-2012, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Oblong

Yes, Claire McCaskill. Looks like the only two people on the planet who want him to stay in are Akin and McCaskill.

Hey, the voters of Missouri spoke, elections have consequences... back when the candidate was Toricelli, I'm pretty sure your tune was probably much different than in this case...

Originally Posted by Oblong

Sorry but I won't stand for lectures from the party of the Kennedys and Clintons about rape and it's definitions.

What on earth does the Clinton and Kennedy's have to do with rape and it's definitions? I really am failing to see the connection.

**John_Brian_K** · 08-21-2012, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by monkeynuts

I just looked at a Gallup poll (just one poll - feel free to add others) that shows that 75% think abortion should be legal - and 22% think it should be illegal - in the case of rape or incest. I don't think the public would be fine with Ryan's views based on the polling.

Abortion

I do agree with you that I highly doubt abortion will be illegal, but I don't take much into Romney/Ryan immediately releasing that statement - the fact is that Ryan is a heartbeat away from the presidency and we know what his thoughts on the issue are. That's actually a bigger debate though...I think a VP's personal beliefs on something are very important even if when nominated they officially adopt the presidential candidate's platform.

Man....way to skew the numbers. IMO 75% do not think 'it should be legal'

Illegal=22%
Legal only under certain curcumstances=52%
Legal in all cases=25%

I think the majority of pro lifers agree there should be cirtain circumstances where it is 'legal'...they may still be morally against it (depending on how 'circumstanses' is actually defined)....so you really end up with 74% who are against it and 25% for it.

**Oblong** · 08-21-2012, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by mtutiger

Hey, the voters of Missouri spoke, elections have consequences... back when the candidate was Toricelli, I'm pretty sure your tune was probably much different than in this case...

What on earth does the Clinton and Kennedy's have to do with rape and it's definitions? I really am failing to see the connection.

First point: Until 5 o clock today it's an apples and oranges comparison. Look it up. If he stays in, then tough. Them's the breaks. BUt he can legally withdraw and be replaced. Torricelli waited past the deadline, by 15 days, and the dems got the NJ supreme court to play ball. So, no different tune.

Second point: Demcorats have been falling all over themselves trying to paint the GOP as someting they are not because of this... and the irony behind that is pretty thick. They are using rape as a political tool and really have no moral high ground on the subject.

**mtutiger** · 08-21-2012, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by John_Brian_K

Man....way to skew the numbers. IMO 75% do not think 'it should be legal'

Illegal=22%
Legal only under certain curcumstances=52%
Legal in all cases=25%

I think the majority of pro lifers agree there should be cirtain circumstances where it is 'legal'...they may still be morally against it (depending on how 'circumstanses' is actually defined)....so you really end up with 74% who are against it and 25% for it.

LOL, you say the numbers are skewed, and then respond by "skewing" the numbers to fit your view. Well done.

**monkeynuts** · 08-21-2012, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by John_Brian_K

Man....way to skew the numbers. IMO 75% do not think 'it should be legal'

Illegal=22%
Legal only under certain curcumstances=52%
Legal in all cases=25%

I think the majority of pro lifers agree there should be cirtain circumstances where it is 'legal'...they may still be morally against it (depending on how 'circumstanses' is actually defined)....so you really end up with 74% who are against it and 25% for it.

What? That wasn't even the poll I was referencing. Check out the second page and the poll about "When the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest"...the numbers I presented are exactly what the poll displays.