Associated Press
Paul Ryan and Todd Akin have routinely been side by side.
Todd Akin, for now the Republicans' U.S. Senate candidate in Missouri, came up with a new tack last night, arguing that the "liberal media is trying to make me drop out" of the race. He apparently wasn't kidding.
Putting aside the fact that the left doesn't want him to quit, what's especially amusing about Akin's sense of victimization is that he seems to think the "liberal media" includes the Republican Party, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Sean Hannity. Even among Akin backers, this one's going to be a tough sell.
The larger issue now, however, is appreciating the scope of the damage Akin is causing. All of a sudden, women's health, reproductive rights, and the Republican "war on women" are at the center of the political world's focus, and people are starting to notice that Akin's right-wing views on abortion are "largely indistinguishable" from most of his GOP colleagues.
That agenda -- largely eclipsed for two years by a protracted fiscal crisis and the fight over how to manage the federal deficit -- has wedged its way, for now at least, to the center of the 2012 campaign. It is focusing attention on an issue that helped earn Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, a reputation as a flip-flopper, threatening the Republican quest for control of the Senate, and leaving Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, Mr. Romney's vice-presidential pick, in the uncomfortable position of distinguishing himself from Mr. Akin, with whom he has often concurred.
It is an agenda that has enjoyed the support of House leaders, including Speaker John A. Boehner and Representative Eric Cantor, the majority leader, who has called anti-abortion measures "obviously very important in terms of the priorities we set out initially in our pledge to America." It became inextricably linked to the near-shutdown of the federal government last year when an agreement to keep the government open was reached only after it was linked to a measure restricting abortion in the District of Columbia.
As Rachel explained last night, even the Republican Party platform, generally overlooked and ignored, is suddenly quite relevant given that its provisions on reproductive rights are in sync with Akin's far-right views -- most notably on rape victims impregnated by their attacker.
Indeed, Akin talked to NBC's "Today" show this morning, noting that Paul Ryan personally urged him to withdraw, which only serves as a reminder that Ryan and Akin co-sponsored legislation to redefine "rape" for the purposes of abortion and a federal "Personhood" measure that would ban abortion, some contraceptives, and in-vitro fertilization.
Akin has changed the trajectory of the 2012 race, and to put it mildly, this isn't what the party had in mind.
Leave a Comment:
How impotent and weak the modern Republican Party establishment must be when it is losing out to the extreme evangelical community in trying to get a silly little congressman to drop out of a Senate race in Missouri. The GOP is dead as we know it. And their de facto leader, Mitt Romney, has no control or authority over the people that will be in power in Washington if he wins this election. Todd Akin represents not a fringe sentiment, but the mainstream views of the majority of conservatives and Tea Party types. They truly believe this kind of garbage, and they are prepared to legislate it as a mandate on every single American citizen. This is a fiht for the future of democracy. - principled progressive
Boehner's problems with his wild 'n' woolly caucus writ large, eh?
Da chickens have come home to roost.
Ya wanted them teabaggers and zealots to jazz up your base?
Got yer wish didn't you Kochs
GOP = Tea-potty know nothings/Bible thumpers = stupid people that know nothing and should NEVER hold public office!
Just proves that old adage right of "when people show you who they are the first time, believe them"!
November 6, 2012 is as important for the United States as January 20, 1933 was for Germany.
excellent
Lets throw some more gasoline on this fire.
http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-official-says-god-chooses-to-bless-raped-women-with-pregnancy
For those who don't want to click the link. (All I could say when I read this was Hooooooooo-wweeeeeeee - talk about bottomless ignorance)
The state of Missouri has been in the national spotlight recently because of comments made by Republican Congressman Todd Akin who claimed that raped women rarely get pregnant. After his statements hit the Internet, immediate outrage burned across the country. Akin later apologized, but his statements have rekindled a nationwide debate. One that republicans desperately do not want to have, lest they alienate a wide majority of female voters.
Sharon Barnes, a high ranking state Republican, came to the defense of her conservative colleague who she believes only "phrased it (his statement) badly."
Barnes was quoted by The New York Times saying, "abortion is never an option." Barnes went on to biblically claim that, "If God has chosen to bless this person [the rape victim] with a life, you don’t kill it."
Barnes did not elaborate on her views for post-pregnancy care, or costs.
Barnes has been a figure in conservative St. Louis politics for years, and currently holds all of the following titles according to her Linkedin profile:
As her comments become more known the GOP will attempt to spin Barnes' clout in the party as little, when in reality she is a big player behind the scenes.
Gah. If she were talking to her own family, there would be little reason to criticize her for preaching her beliefs and values.
Instead she's saying this to the NYT as an official for an American political party with a candidate in the race for President. And her intent is to push this agenda forward if they win.
I won't fault her for her religious beliefs, but I despise that she insists on inflicting her morality on the rest of the country.
The title was a good riff on Neal Young- and like the junkies in his song, the Republicans keep sticking that needle of tortured self-rightousness back in their arm, keeping looking for that bigger hit, and keeping on returning to their far-right wing dealers who promise them 'more and more'.
The walls been hit. The damage is done.
There's good reason the Democrats are have so many high-powered women speak at their convention.
The talk of the Republican convention? Restriction of the right to choose and Donald 'Clown' Trump firing an Obama impersonator. Har dee har.
Mitt's "qualifications"? He really REALLY wants the job!
Put that up against teh women, teh taxes, the teh Mormon, and it is no wonder he is dancing like a cat on a hot tin roof. With no Liz Taylor to keep him company.
Sarah Palin thinks the answer to winning the MO senate seat is for Sarah Steelman to enter the race on a third party ticket. I think we should all get behind that idea.
(bwahahahaha)
I watched the Akin show last night that included an interview/discussion with Bob Herbert. I believe that Rachel, Bob and most commenters, even on the left, are pursuing a false trail in identifying individuals, their changes of position and assuming that 'normal' politicians track to the center in general elections and while in office. First, look at George W. Bush. Second, I commend to your attention "Delirium' by Nancy L. Cohen which was recently published. The subtitle is: " How the Sexual Counterrevolution is Polarizing America'. She argues, fairly convincingly, that the groups that make up the 'sexual counterrevolution' have made themselves essential to any Republican candidate with national ambition. Akin, Ryan and Romney are not aberrations and their actual personal views are irrelevant. Cohen argues that the 'sexual counterrevolutionaries' demand and get their candidates and their pound of flesh from them.
Cohen is far more interesting in demonstrating her case than explaining why this group is so persistent and powerful - hence the title, her shorthand for their motivation. I don't pretend to understand any better than Cohen does but it is clear that the motivations are deep, to some extent unconscious and strongly linked with psycho-sexual identity and gender roles.
Cohen would make a good guest and pursuing her argument and her evidence for many valuable programs.
If Romney had chosen Chris Christie or Tim Pawlenty as his VP candidate, I doubt that the republican chorus for Akin to step down would have been so vocal.
I tend to think that the response has less to do with a senate seat, and more to do with the fact that Akin is so closely tied to Paul Ryan.
if "rape is rape" then why do all the Bills before Congress and the media keep repeating the phrase "except in cases of rape and incest". Incest is rape. Mostly father-daughter rape I believe. Despite jokes and connotations that it is consensual it is not. I think the continued use of the word "incest" is all part of the same sick world view that uses terms like "legitimate rape". Let's stop using the term and call it what it is: rape.
Incest and molestation are rape, I don't care what anybody says.
What I don't get is the whole "exception for rape" as if to dismantle Roe-v-Wade is acceptable as long as there is an exception for rape.
Incest doesn't necessarily have to involve violence, manipulation or a minor. Incest can involve two very grown individuals, like brother & sister. Who both consent to having sex with one another as adults. And have a child together. It's not rape in the case. Which is why there is a distinction between the two.
Calvin, in the case of the brother and sister, you think it should be against the law for them to seek an abortion, knowing the dangers of inbreeding?
I just came across this quote of the day In M Dowds column.had to share
Dr. Blumenthal is alarmed that Akin is a member of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
“What is very disturbing to me is that people like Mr. Akin who have postulated this secret mechanism for avoiding pregnancy have developed their own make-believe world of science based on entirely self-serving beliefs of convenience or just ignorance,” he said. “I don’t think we want these people to be responsible for the lives of others.”
That is the real issue to me . Willful stupidity
"Beliefs" are easily acquired, and only shed with great difficulty. For an example, check out "Cargo Cult".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult
Willful stupidity? More like militant stupidity.
Should women look forward to Rape Panels just to make sure they are "legitimate"?
I don't know how people get appointed to committees in congress. What qualifications do they need? Of course these are political appointments but when asked to serve wouldn't it be good if appointees had some knowledge base?
"The Akin and the damage done"? I'm impressed Steve if this was indeed a throw back to Neil Young's song "Needle and the Damage Done". It fits.
Akin's intransigence is in keeping with the obstinance of the Tea Party element that has taken over the GOP. A snake will bite the hand that feeds it.
The "liberal media is trying to make me drop out" of the race. ". Wow. This is almost as stupid a remark than his rape comments. Is this supposed to mean that he DIDN'T know that Missouri Democrats were helping him in his primary win?
Yes-- and I have been posting on his facebook page urging him to stay in the race as he is the only GOP candidate that is honestly sharing his views; the others are too scared or dishonest to do it.
I urge all liberal folks to do the same. You don't have to tell him the reason we want him to continue in the race.....
@A Brady, That's brilliant! "Keep telling the truth, dude! Thumbs UP!!"
Here is an article I read this morning http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/savannah-dietrich-sexual-assault_n_1819572.html?1345584520&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing6%7Cdl9%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D195557
It involves teenagers and sexual assault. What I find interesting in the article is how the attorney for the assaultor says that the girl (assaultee) ruined his client's life by charging him with a crime and going public with it.
It's hard to determine from the article what actually happened - if there was a "legitmate" rape but the boys pled guilty to a lesser charge of felony sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism and got a minimum punishment - which is unclear. The girl felt that it was less than a slap on the wrist and tweeted her outrage. The lawyer for one of the boys is outraged that she went public because they are minors and it had been a big secret. Continuing to plead his case, the lawyer mentions poor, poor, poor Mr. Akin and look at what the internet did to him:
According to this lawyer, neither his client nor Mr. Akin did a damn thing wrong and don't deserve to be talked about in public and a teenage boy who commits and admits to any form of sexual abuse should be allowed to continue on with his life as if nothing happened. He still deserves his ivy league sports scholarship. The lesson in this is that there is more "justice" in tweeting a crime (well, at least a crime of sexual abuse against a female) than there is to be found in some judicial systems in this country!
And to make his case he cites poor, poor, poor Mr. Akin and how the big, bad meanies on the internet ruined him! Really? Members of the party of personal responsibility bear no personal responsiblity for what comes out of their narrow-minds through their mouths?
Where does this thinking come from . . . I mean other than from the centuries prior to the 21st? Has only half the population of this country made any progress in the last century?
No no no no. See we're all a bunch of whiny women who haven't gotten laid so we hate men and that's why we get mad over these comments! Really this is all the fault of feminism!!!! Men shouldn't be punished for raping women- women should bear their seed and raise their child! Hell that man should be able to marry her- it's in the Bible!!! And we're a Christian nation!!!! Women are property they're not like men. Men are sentient, conscious beings who act on their own. Women have periods and talk too much! And you know you gotta rape her in order to keep her in line! Sometimes she won't shut up and the only way to get her to is to beat her or rape her!!! She knows she likes it!
#endofsnark
I mean I guess if you had this person as your client you'd come up with any asinine way to defend your client too. I suppose I shouldn't harp on the lawyer too hard since he is just doing his job- whether you agree or disagree with your client's actions you still must defend your client. Maybe the lawyer was thinking he could appeal to the male insecurity movement and this would prove an adequate defense? I am not sure. I do know there seems to be a lot of male resentment towards women and in particular feminism (even though most of what's applied to feminism isn't, in fact, feminist ideology, but I digress). Perhaps there's a disgruntled male demographic he was pandering to?
David Letterman:"I just heard now that Mitt Romney has asked Todd Akin to step down. I thought, oh, that's too bad, Todd Akin was the guy to lead the Republican Party into the 16th century."
If I'm not mistaken, Rachel's scheduled to be on Letterman's show tonight.
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
My question to the Republican candidates that as of late have dropped the pagan idolatry of Ronald Reagan is why they don't take on of his principles as a rising young star in the political world to heart now a days. Reagan once said, and I'm paraphrasing it here, "if it's not right for you, that doesn't mean it's wrong for the rest of the world." Today this idea that if I can make something wrong for everyone else then I'll some how be able to better deal with the world in my own selfish way. Personally, I'm a recovering alcoholic of over 26 years, but it's my recovery and if I don't drink, it certainly doesn't mean that my parents shouldn't. They don't have the problem, I do. These candidates that are obsessed with abortion, reproductive rights and the general war on women, and gay marriage seem to say they don't want big government but at the same time want someone else to wipe their feet of the crap they are spreading on the world. It's time for personal accountability to return and compromise to be the functioning principle of government once again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mg_4O6XmKAQ&feature=share
AMAZING VIDEO...
I almost didn't click on this. It's a folk singer with a really good voice singing about the "legitimate rape" issue. Well done. I'd say it was funny, but the issue really isn't.
what Akin has done is akin to painting a stealth bomber fluorescent orange and attaching deer whistles to the wings. He merely stated what the right wingers already felt and Ryan's own person hood bill proves it.
Nice imagery! LOL!!
That's the crux of it, isn't it? He said exactly what they think, and it's really loud and ugly. There's no phrasing that can clean it up.
President Moonwalk
And the Backstep Boy.
(Though I think "Vice President Moonwalk" also has a nice ring.
Regarding the "personhood" initiative identifying the point of fertilization as the beginning of human life. According to obstetric science, nearly 25% of fertilized eggs NEVER implant in the uterine wall lining (an occurrence not under anyone's control) and is then sloughed and leaves the uterus during menstruation. Given that, for any sexually active, fertile women, every time she has a period there should be a funeral. Put that information in a logic table!
Pregnancy and birthing hold real risks. A woman should decide about taking that risk. Not even one man can experience that.
Trust me if we did; abortions would be government provided and available at every 7/11.
Mark, Ellen,
I believe the saying goes: If men got pregnant their first abortion would be a Rite of Passage.
The Smart Vagina
and The Real Solution
It seems to me that the problem isn’t when babies start, but
the people who start them. Yesterday I learned on the news that nearly half the
babies born to unwed mothers are born to teenage i.e. underage and raped,
poverty stricken daughters, both black and white. Low and behold, fathered by the boyfriend of
the mother. There wouldn’t be nearly as
much brew ha ha about who is and is not a person if, when these babies show up with a baby inside them, there was a
mandatory, federal law requiring not, that the this baby mother view the
heartbeat of her unborn child by once again invading her vagina, but by testing
of the embryonic fluid to determine paternity.
No 3 strike and you’re out rule here; your ass is slammed in jail! Many more babies would be conceived by actual
consenting adults and, my bet is, many more of these little persons would be
welcomed into this world with pure joy. And one more thing, for those
uncivilized cavemen we are hearing about.
The definition of rape doesn’t require an adjective. It is rape if the
words no or stop, or even, I thought I wanted to and now I don’t, cross the
mouth of the woman in question. Just
stop there. Grow up.
Two disturbing things about Akin,
1) A middle aged man not knowing where babies come from and how babies are made
and
2) I believe Akin is trying to justify his sexual history, that being, They liked it rough and had babies so it wasn't rape.
Rob, are you aware that libel is a real thing? If you don't have any proof for what you "believe," you shouldn't post it. Maybe the phrase you are looking for is "I wonder if..." because that's what people say when they are speculating.
Rachael - I've become aware of the implications of the Personhood bill during the Akin debacle. Is it possible that that could be made into law? Does that make every woman who has an abortion a murderer? What about the woman who has an abortion out of the country? What about the woman who has a spontaneous abortion? Does she become a murder suspect? How about a miscarriage from a careless fall? Is she guilty of manslaughter? Will women once again have to sneak down alleys to the back room abortionists at risk of their lives? Then fear being accused of being murderers? How can the taxpayers afford to keep all the women who abort in prison? Would Congress actually be idiotic enough to pass such a bill?
If we assume we are stupid, we are free to imagine a wider range of possibilities.
The left has given in effect million dollars of air time lending their resources (time) in an endless display of sympathetic support of his many apologies, his eloquence; his soften appearance with incisive pabulum prattle.
It is just a simple matter of economics to see that too much has been spent on too little. The "little" and the "big", where the "little" has been with us for very long time, and the "big" talks to emotions that become confused when it comes time to vote.
The little is the concept of birth control (reproductive behaviors) that has been explained and abuses for thousands of years, if not since the world population has exploded, if not since the condom was a conundrum. These are little matters in reality that are incomprehensible out sized beyond reason. A decadal distraction.
That little concept has inflated itself into the gigantic proportions of "big" that were once were lady secrets, but today are too large to open a door on a discussion. A discussion that is entirely blocked by emotional appeals, if not entirely disabling in that first we must express all that has ever discussed to date. Then we haven't started and must wait 100 more years.
Yes there are larger more important lives to save than the unborn, and yes we cannot address larger issues that at least off solutions to the economic problems if we have to review history back the time of the tree dwellers.
One possibility is that we are being set up, as if it were not possible to see how? It may not have been unplanned, to direct everyone's attention to the hardened extremes, fruitless and wasteful as all time spent on the extreme is since the extreme will not be banished vanquished. Why allow the extremes to direct all our attention? It cannot be of good value, when we need to be baking bread, to be waiting for the wheat to rot.
Akins controversy was set up and timed to occur to exactly on time, with the faux back and forth escalation, not because it is important, but because it's shallow and fruitless so enrages the opposition. So much indignation that the opposition can no longer keep a sober head, of what can be achieved and why. Well into the definition of candidate choices, we have flack excuses, to ignore the main campaign.
The discussion of about the role of government in righting the economy that has gone off the rails because of the public not paying attention to the insane deregulation of business prudence bought into this nation by mistaken man who is quite dead.
The government, since it has the authority and the obligation that no other can share. Has to bring a vivid understanding, of how modern technology, can be used to change the economy from disaster to vitality. The employment of millions, the earning of millions, the feeding and housing of millions, the raising, nurturing and education of millions, the transport of million upon millions of tons of goods, across a vast continent and world.
That's not bold it is bread and butter.
If you are among the stampeding herd who is running madly from event to event , from shiny object to shiny object, for trivial commodity with fellow beings, then that sums up the significant of "little" and unimportant issues, and the distracting nature of issues too "big" to solve. The summary is this you cannot be working on issues of lasting value if you are following a script created by someone else, even if that script appeared "spontaneously". How can we do better than to focus in things that can be done, and then to do them, if we are just drifting, being blow about as downy fluff, in uncertain winds.