Late last week, the RNC's Sean Spicer ran into some trouble when asked about rape and incest exemptions in his party's national platform. He argued that the platform doesn't explicitly say there can't be exemptions, so who knows, maybe they exist.
As Tricia noted earlier, Virginia Gov. Bob "Ultrasound" McDonnell (R) was asked a similar question on ABC yesterday, and gave a similar answer. When George Stephanopoulos brought up the platform and its support for a Human Life Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, McDonnell, who oversaw the platform process, said, "The details certainly are left to Congress and, ultimately, to the states and the people on how they ratify such an amendment."
As a factual matter, McDonnell and Spicer are simply wrong. The Republican platform demands a constitutional amendment that would ban all abortions, regardless of, to use Paul Ryan's phrase, "the method of conception."
But why are McDonnell and Spicer lying about this? I have a hunch I know the answer.
Maddow Blog chart based on CNN poll data
I put together this chart based on the latest CNN poll (pdf), which asked respondents, "Now I am going to read some specific situations under which an abortion might be considered. For each one, please say whether you think abortion should be legal in that situation, or illegal."
The results weren't close -- 88% believe abortion should be legal when a woman's life is endangered, 83% believe abortion should be legal when a woman's physical health is endangered, and 83% believe abortion should be legal when a pregnancy is caused by rape or incest.
In other words, the Akin/Paul-Ryan/GOP-platform position on abortion is really unpopular.
On Fox News yesterday, Mitt Romney expressed his frustration with Democrats trying to tie him to Akin, saying it's "sad" for the Obama campaign to "stoop to such a low level."
In reality, however, Akin's position on the federal government forcing women to take their pregnancy to term if they are impregnated by a rapist has been embraced by Romney's running mate and Romney's platform. Democrats aren't supposed to even mention this?
Leave a Comment:
"Mitt Romney expressed his frustration with Democrats trying to tie him to Akin, saying it's "sad"..."
No Mittens, what's really sad is you writhing on the floor lying every time your lips move! What's also sad is that the lame-stream media doesn't call you out on your lies, and what's really sad is that the sheeple are so ignorant of the facts that they might hold their nose and vote for you anyway!
Could not have said it better myself!
Pretty much! Wake up People if the facts don't match their agenda they will make it up as they go along.
So why is no one calling the forced vaginal ultrasound what it really is? - penetration without consent - that's medical rape! Close your eyes Governor ultrasound, Akin, Ryan and the entire Republican platform - Karma is coming.
What one needs to remember is the GOP likes to keep its people uneducated. That way they remain ignorant. All one has to do is look at the FACTS, but the problem is they are too lazy, ignorant, or so brainwashed they will not even take the time to open and honestly check the facts. It's much easier to sit on the couch smack'n on chips and bon-bons and watch Rush or any of the other fear/hate mongurers.
RAINBOW: Been thinking the same thing since Rachel reported on his bill, but please let me make a slight correction. It's medical rape only if the doctor performing the procedure shares the same intent (humiliation, denial of a constitutional right) as the one who mandated the procedure be done regardless of medical necessity. But THAT person is guilty of rape, even if the reluctant doctor isn't. It's not medical rape, it's government rape; political rape. Gov. Ultrasound is a sexual predator.
"Romney/Ryan: America's Comeback Team." ???
Let's be real, America's Throwback Team!
I am just wondering, why didn't they call McCain-Palin a "Comeback Team?"
The US was in far worse shape then.
It's frightening how close we came to having a Keating-5 President.
Rachel Maddow is one of the few journalists who doesn't need to be reminded of this tenet of journalism: It’s vital for news outlets to aggressively call out presidential campaigns when they distort the truth. http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=5375
Demand that mainstream media networks report the facts and call out candidates who lie at: Signon.org/sign/mainstream-media-report
Thanks for the link, Patterson. It's constitutionally vital that journalists do this. I think newspapers' precarious financial situations make their executives afraid to dog a lying candidate or official and be denied access to him/her. But Watergate made Woodward and Bernstein's careers. I wish they had more courage. I suspect the reporters do, but are being held back.
The ultimate narcissism is thinking your ShMitt does not stink. Mitt believes every one of his pronouncements is gospel. Imagine him at a summit conference pouting and whining when someone disagrees with him.
Romney and his wife on TV talking about buying shirts at Costco. What a load of crap that his political organizers had him and his wife do to try to show hey look I like these shirts, even though I don’t like your 7-11 cookies and donuts. Romney if you really want to do something eat that 50 cent box of Mac and Cheese and say how much you love it, but than again Romney would be a load of crap there too. Either Romney is the cheapest bastard around or he has always been pushing a cover-up trying to pretend he is just like everybody else with a much lower income. So which is it? Romney is so cheap, he will do anything, even to the point of income tax evasion or screw over and deceive people to gain more wealth? Or Romney is the one of the biggest deceivers around and all just for his own political and finance gain? But that has been Romney’s whole so-called political career put up a big deception to what Romney is really like. Romney may be a so-called loving person to his family, but what he has done to others is a totally different story. Because Romney has not done anything really for the improvement of people’s lives, except to assure sub-standard wages and benefits to people who work in Romney’s companies as he accumulates huge wealth. Ann Romney can sputter all she wants with deceptions considering she has a pretty cushie life as she looks to maintain her financial wealth.
Ann "she's buying a stairway to heaven."
Um... what exactly has Mr. Romney "done to others"? It sounds to me like you hate him just because he's wealthy. You assume that he must be screwing others over, and you blame him for trying to legitimately keep more of his wealth rather than paying more taxes, so he utilizes the available deductions.
This class envy and hatred of the rich is precisely why Romney feels like he has to pretend to be "just like us" and demonstrate that he shops at Costco. Yes, it's a bit of a farce, but it's necessary because there are so many people who harbor such an irrational hatred of "the rich". Except, of course, when it's a rich leftist who got his money as an entertainer.
As much as I disagreed with President Bush's policies and agenda, I respected the office he held and respected that the People voted and made their choice. Unfortunately for the first time in my life I can say if Romney and Ryan win in November, I will not consider them legitimate. I have no respect for either one of them, but that is not the reason for my point of view. The Republican Party is suppressing the vote and the Board of Directors for the Republican Party (formerly known as SCOTUS) allowed our Government to be purchased by the highest bid. That is not Democracy and therefore not a legitimate election in my point of view.
I had not thought of it this way. . .
Colonel Jayman there is a big difference between rich people on how they live their lives just like everybody else, you should know that by now.
Colonel Jayman, why do you want to put these rich people on a Pedestal, when they are just like everybody else? Rich people have their good and bad sides just like the rest of us and when the news media exposes these people for what they are, why do you want to deny it, when it is true?
With Ann and Nikki in the primetime slots, they're obviously going to make Tuesday Ladies' Night, but then they go and finish it off with Chris Christie, which has got to ruin the mood considerably.
Paul Ryan is not a foot soldier in the GOP WAR ON WOMEN.
Paul Ryan is a GENERAL
It would be interesting to see the data on how the current legality of Abortion (including current Hyde Amendment restrictions based on term) size up in that poll, because without that information, we don't get an idea on whether or not people are actually pro-choice or not. Paul Ryan was at least intellectually honest when he said that the method of conception doesn't change the definition of when life begins -- I happen to disagree on his definition of when life begins but I at least respect that he's consistent about it.
What these beliefs (that the polls are illustrating) come down to a fundamental premise, which can be summed up in a two-part question:
Do you believe that women should be punished for having sex, and do you believe that children make good punishment.
Rape and incest exemptions exist because people perceive the woman as not having had consensual sex, and so she is not required to be punished for it. Life and health of the mother is a nod that the woman signed up to be a mom, something just went wrong and putting her in danger might result in motherless children or lack of future children. Of course most people won't cotton to this belief, at least not publicly. But if you believe that aborting a fetus that was conceived in rape is morally different than aborting a fetus that was conceived in consensual sex, then there's something else going on there than "abortion is murder or something very close." After all, you can't murder a 2-year-old because his daddy was a criminal.
I always look at these sorts of polls as an opportunity to start a discussion with people about what's going on in their heads surrounding sex, pregnancy, and abortion. I've had surprisingly positive results.
To answer your somewhat simplistic and insulting question:
"Do you believe that women should be punished for having sex, and do you believe that children make good punishment."
the answer is No and No. I am pro choice because I believe that it is not appropriate to throw women in jail for terminating a pregnancy. Making abortion illegal will NOT end abortion, but it will result in more deaths from "back alley" abortions and women and doctors being prosecuted even in cases of spontaneous terminations of pregnancies. This is not speculation, but what happened before Rowe v. Wade.
In the case of the health or life of the mother there should be no question. Under the republican approach to this, women who have ectopic pregnancies are faced with trying to carry a pregnancy to term that has next to zero chance of being viable, but has a very high probability of killing them or at least rendering them sterile. It is not as you say just that "something just went wrong and putting her in danger might result in motherless children or lack of future children." It is because there is an ethical position that a living person's life has a higher priority than a potential person and therefore women should be allowed to choose in such situations, especially in cases where there is an infinitesimal chance of viability. This position is consistent with Jewish religious teaching also.
The majority of people in this country are pro-choice, not anti-abortion, so most of your argument is moot. It does seem to be logically inconsistent to allow exceptions for rape and incest if you really believe that life begins at conception, but the reason for supporting such an exception is not because they believe that a woman shouldn't be punished with a child for being forced to have sex. Being forced to follow through with a pregnancy conceived in violence is the punishment, not the child. Pregnancy and delivery by themselves are not risk free so to force someone to go through that when they wanted nothing to do with it is a reasonable exception.
Craig, in case it wasn't obvious, I am adamantly pro-choice. Those questions are aimed specifically at people who claim to be pro-life but would make exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother.
Mighty Ponygirl, your question:
Is SO SO SO right ON! Thank you!
But, I think it needs to be emphasized that it is with regard to legal abortion in general, and not just in reference to Todd Akin's comments (or rape exclusions) specifically. The root issue, as a policy position, is the push for "personhood" amendments and the desire of the GOP to outlaw all abortion, for ANY reason.
The effect of any sort of personhood legislation, or outlawing abortion, and even making contraception illegal, unavailable, or difficult to afford is to force women to bear children, even if they do not want to (and/or do not have the capacity).
Thank you for speaking to a powerful motivation for imposing the religious beliefs of some onto the entire population at large.
Obama campaign stooping to a low level? What a bunch of Mittwits.
Please explain "Positive" results. Results are "positive," "negative," or "inconclusive," and are so described based on a premise. What was your premise?
Just the fact that there's a journalist devoting basically his entire time to "chronicling Mitt's mendacity" tells you something. Or it should. It definitely should.
i've wondered if Akin is actually a sacrificial lamb to the Republicans - they've all lined up to attack him so the rest of us over look the abortion planks in their platform and so they can say - See, we like women! Look how we are treating Akin!!!
Nothing to wonder about, he is. They are using his comments as an opportunity to say "see, we are not unreasonable on woman's health issues. We are all against this nut." It is an attempt at a smokescreen to hide the fact that their stated positions on this issue are exactly the same as Akin's.
I've wondered the same thing... If the real goal of the GOP is to get all the liberals in an uproar over rape exclusions while they quietly put personhood legislation in their official party platform, and push to outlaw abortion in all other circumstances.
Here's how The Romney Campaign was BLINDSIDED by this VERY topic at his record setting $2M fundraiser in Little Rock last Wednesday....http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2012/08/22/protesters-welcome-romney 3 dozen protesters vs. 5 individual, paid, out-of-state "supporters"...the optics were NOT good for RomneyCo., Inc. all local Little Rock TV stations (KARK, KATV, Fox16, KTHV) have video...look at the faces (but note no audio) as $25,000/person attendees scurried like roaches from a light.
I like Adlai Stevenson's comment: "When the Republicans stop telling lies about us we'll stop telling the truth about Republicans."
Love it! Love Stevenson.
I wonder if anyone has given any consideration to the idea of how satisfying it would be to slap the hell out of Reince Priebus (sp).
Well, Anderson Cooper says it's a lie to tie Akin or the party platform to Romney.
"Little Gloria" (happy at last) Vanderbilt's little boy needs to retire to his trust fund.
What many seem to be missing here is that the far "right" truly feels abortion is wrong in any case/any circumstance. Even killing abortion doctors is "justified" when they count the total number of lives saved at the expense of one. At 18, I had a similar view from my then short lifetime of sitting in a pew and hearing the preaching against it. After all, who could kill a tiny innocent baby. . .
Time, life, experience and education have tempered my POV and I now realize that each individual needs to make their own choice and my choices/opinions should not be foisted upon another whose shoes I have not walked in (hence the term "pro-choice).
At twenty, still "sweet & innocent" I was the victim of a violent rape (1977), the first question I was asked: "What were you wearing?" Horrified that this could possibly be "my fault" in some way, I promptly just wanted to go home, bathe, try to recover and hopefully forget. That was not to be as time soon revealed I had miraculously conceived. All of my well defined "morals" went right out the window as I frantically searched for a state that would allow termination, even under these circumstances.
I have long since forgiven my assaulter, but my nightmares often contain the faces of those who pelted trash and chanted "baby-killer" @ me as I attempted to enter the only clinic I could find that would perform the procedure I so desperately desired. I hope one day I will be able to forgive them as well. . .
Well said. Your body, your choice. Period.
They aren't worthy of your forgiveness. You are a lady and can hold your head up in any setting. What you went through is just an example of how some of us (men) look upon women as less than equals. God Bless You, and YOU GO GIRL!!
I am so sorry. I think most women feel for you, hence do not agree with Romney & Co's stance on abortion. We do need all women (like that is going to happen) to take the stance that women have a right to rule over their own body. In this day and age it makes absolutley no sense that some grey-haired old white men decide over womens bodies. We women should not let that happen. I wonder how NittWitt's Mormon women would act after they where raped and got pregnant....elated. Doesn't matter....the ones that agree with this policy most likely won't get pregnant anymore one way or another, and the rest of us should fight this to the teeth or else will will be back in the kitchen...barefoot and pregnant.
I am proud to have read you post. May your life be full of joy.
It may surprise many to know that the Mormon church believes in free-will on the issue of abortion; leaving it up to each and their own conscious to decide. They are comfortable with this approach because they believe that spirit children will be born regardless of miscarriages and abortion. For them the spirit child is given the opportunity to gain a body one way or the other. Mormons also use contraception without stigma (unlike Catholics).
The "personhood" amendment the right wing is teeing up for is the real goal of the party. Parsing over what constitutes rape and plausible exceptions is just to pacify the masses until they are in power.
The way to prevent this faith-based, non-science nonsense from gaining traction is to make sure every woman you know gets to the polls. Host a women voting party - educate everyone about absentee voting so they have no excuses on November 6th.
We have all been focusing on women and they rights that are being taken away medically. What rights are being taken away for men? Insurance pays for the meds to help men fix their erection problems. Leave women alone with their rights. If a women is not allowed to have an abortion I would like to see a law country wide that the man that got her pregent help pay for that childs cost. There are far too many single mothers with no support from the fathers. Most of these women have to turn to other state programs to help them raise that child.
How about a law that says any legislator that votes for forcing women to bear children against their will has to personally help pay the costs for having and raising that child?
I don't think The Rom knows what it is like to struggle from payday to payday, because he was born with a golden spoon in his mouth. There is the talk about Ann having MS and the write off of the 77,000 for the horse to help her with her MS, give me a break. I have MS and I could never get away with that lie on my taxes. Ann is not the only one with MS, I feel for her because I have it and know how debilating it is. My life was turned upside down when I got sick. I lost my good paying job and now live on disability. I have to pay for my own medical insurance because you have to be on disability 2 years to get medical care. I didn't ask for MS and I worked hard all my life putting money into SSI and Medicare. Mitt and Ryan want to get rid of the program so they do not have to pay into the system they will not use, because of the great retirement plans they have.
Take away "their" Blue Pills..........See what reaction you get then!!!!! As Steve Miller used to sing>> "Going To Mexico" ( appologies because thats a GREAT SONG! )
What I wanna know is who makes up the 12% that think it isn't ok to perform an abortion to save the life of the mother? Are they sociopaths who don't care if she dies or just too stupid to realize that if the mother dies the embryo dies anyway?
Part of the anti-choice PR campaign against any exceptions carve-outs is the idolization of women who chose to keep their pregnancies despite the dangers to their life and health: Look at Tim Tebow's Mom's Superbowl Ad. It was basically "I could have died giving birth to football Jesus, but my faith kept me safe."
Women are implicitly told that if they're not willing to lay down their lives for their babies from the moment of conception, that they're heartless selfish monsters. Most women are supposed to choose this, but I can believe that 12% of the population would make that choice for them.
I almost died from an ectopic pregnancy 6 years ago. I received a methotrexate injection (chemical abortion) to try and halt the pregnancy but a week later I was in the ER in excruciating pain because it didn't work. The doctors removed the embryo (surgical abortion) to prevent me from bleeding to death. The life of the embryo wasn't in play, it was going to die either way. The only question was if I was going to die with it. To the 12% that thinks that would be ok, I say tell that to my husband and my 5 other kids!
Ectopics are only one life threatening complication, but they average from 1-2.5% of all pregnancies. Without treatment, the mortality rate is very high. There are 6 million pregnancies in the US every year, that means 60,000-150,000 possible deaths from ectopic pregnancies of US women in their prime every single year. The GOP can't get away with being vague or just leaving the exceptions open to interpretation. Put it in writing!
Think, "more Catholic than the Pope:" even the RCC allows abortion to save the mother's life (even if their "reasoning" makes your skin crawl.)
Leah, one thing that's important to remember is that there are countries that have this exact legislation. What happens is women die anyway because there aren't doctors willing to provide the service for fear of losing their license in case some prosecutor with an ax to grind finds out that some woman had an abortion.
Unless it's safe and legal for all, you can't guarantee that it will be safe and legal for the "some."
OK, let's use the Republicans' logic and ask Claire McCaskill to propose legislation requiring any man wanting Viagra to sit before a panel of 3 female physicians from Virginia to prove his erectile dysfunction and swear on penalty of incarceration that the purpose for having an erection is for procreation only--no spilling of his seed or recreational sex. If you choose to follow the Bible, follow the Bible.
Laughed myself silly over this comment, you've hit the nail on the head with the mental picture of that scenario.
I've often wondered why so many insurance companies will pay for ED treatments.
I've always thought that if men could get pregnant, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Great comment...I'd like to add that they should be three Lesbian doctors, don't know but I'd hope they'd have a little less sympathy for those old dirtbags. I know I would...either way. Already shows the bias for women that a drug such as Viagra as even been researched, manufactured and distributed so these old goats can perform, cheat on their wives, and continue to procreate. I say women should demand the end of these drugs. Men want to rule over our bodies and tht's what tey'll need to give in return.
@Berlner49 - great comment, but one interjection: Viagra itself was actually an accidental discovery and initially meant to treat circulation and heart problems. (It inhibits a protein known as phosphodiesterase which breaks down stimulating proteins in cells). Funnily enough their component (Viagra) turned out to be specific for a single phosphodiesterase which is only found in men and almost entirely involved in erections - it literally acts to keep up the erection stimulus. When they noticed this "side-effect" a great marketing idea was born. However, the amount of research money going into ED and hair-loss in men is astounding and makes researchers like me quite mad. :p
If Romney is elected, when Bryer or Ginsberg dies in the next four years, he will appoint another Alito to the court. Roe v Wade will be overturned and states will be free to place any restriction they wish on abortion. There will be no exemptions. So Romney believing in exemptions is completely irrelevant. Romney knows this. He is a pathological liar and an economic traitor. He is the perfect nominee of American Taliban, otherwise known as the Republican party.
Agreed. The single most important power the president has is appointing the Supremes. That should be included in any discussion of reproductive rights.
This topic needs to be spread around the country. We women can't allow Romney into the White House just for that reason alone.
Holy crap.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-slansky-/paul-ryan-said-something-_b_1832377.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false
When are the media going to make Romney and Ryan answer for these comments? Are they all owned by Republicans?
These are alot of republicans who have seen the light (my husband for one) and have joined Republicans for Obama I recommend you check them out it gives you hope for the future of this country and proves that not all GOP's are bigoted idiots who believe the bible should rule this country and not the consitution.
I also have a question for the RNC if the election is all about the economy why is your platform all about your social agenda. IF you don't want to talk about it why make it your platform.
Congrats! You picked a good one! Lucky you. I hope your husband has a lot of rational friends, too.
This week is gonna be a wild ride.
That gives us hope that there will once again be two moderate parties, that can have different points of views on issues, while respecting the other and coming together when the Country needs a solution.
I might have missed something. Has anyone asked the men of the GOP what they would do if any of their wives, daughters, daughter in laws or granddaughters were raped and became pregnant what/the action they'd take? It's always different when one has to ware the shoe they've chosen for someone else. Think they would have the wife carry the rapists baby to term and then give it up for adoption? Maybe they would keep the baby and love it as their own. Just wondering.