Getty Images
Todd Akin apparently won't be sitting alone much longer.
After Rep. Todd Akin, the Republicans' U.S. Senate candidate in Missouri, said women can magically "shut down" unwanted pregnancies that result from "legitimate" rapes, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said Todd "needs to get out of this race."
That was a month ago. Yesterday, Blunt said something very different; "Congressman Akin and I don't agree on everything, but he and I agree the Senate majority must change." In other words, Akin may be delusional, but he has an "R" after his name, and that's what really matters.
As Rachel noted on the show last night, there's a lot of this going around.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee issued a statement Wednesday clarifying its support for Rep. Todd Akin in the Missouri Senate race and suggesting it might spend money to help elect him, after saying a month ago that it would not do so.
"There is no question that for Missourians who believe we need to stop the reckless Washington spending, rein-in the role of government in people's lives, and finally focus on growing jobs in this country, that Todd Akin is a far more preferable candidate than liberal Sen. Claire McCaskill," NRSC executive director Rob Jesmer said. "As with every Republican Senate candidate, we hope Todd Akin wins in November, and we will continue to monitor this race closely in the days ahead."
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the Republican establishment was bluffing. GOP leaders wanted Akin to quit, so they said they'd withhold any and all financial support for his campaign, but they simply didn't mean it. When the final withdrawal deadline came and went on Tuesday, Republicans were forced to accept the circumstances: they desperately want to win a Senate majority; their odds of doing so are dwindling; and Akin's race is competitive.
Ergo, never mind all that stuff they said in August.
Tactics aside, this once again puts the Republican Party on record in support of a Senate candidate who, among other things, opposes Medicare and Social Security, wants to abolish the minimum wage, and considers student loans cancerous socialism.
It was easier for the GOP to distance itself from such extremism when it was disavowing Akin. But if he's back in his party's good graces, it's probably time to renew questions about Republican support for his radical vision.
Leave a Comment:
Akin's garbage is mainstream GOP ideology The only difference between Todd Akin and Paul Ryan is that Mitt Romney's running mate is smarter and more charming than the blubbering Missouri Tea Party man and his wild theories of "legitimate rape" and female parts that "shut that down." The GOP's number-two guy is behind every single piece of legislation that Akin backs concerning abortion. Paul Ryan is as extreme as it gets in American politics on the issue of the privacy rights of women. Ryan has cosponsored and specifically brought up bills in the US Congress that would force every single woman to give birth in every case of pregnancy -- no exceptions for rape or even the life of the mother. This is a major gaffe from the GOP that has taken all of the air out of Mitt's campaign and turned the election into a referendum on medieval-style views on women and women's rights. - progressive
Sorry Activist, but substituting "legitimate" for "forcible" isn't a disqualifying offense among the politically incorrect.
No, Shooter, but it reveals underlying attitudes and assumptions that are extremist and, one would hope, antiquated:
1. That ideology trumps facts. The "shutting that down" myth is an attempt to make palatable the ruthless violence of government forced birth, in its most loathsome form. It pretends that pregnancy can't result from incest or rape. That it's an utter fiction is of no moment to ideological zealots, because they have a long history of suppressing facts and evidence that don't support their ideology. This history extends from Akin's delusion, to the Bush administration's suppression of scientific data that undermined its positions, all the way back to the persecution of Galileo. It's the classic response of extremists who reject what is in favor of what they chose to believe should be.
2. That government forced birth is consistent with a small government position. This should need no explanation. Just stating the idea reveals its folly.
3. That the technology of choosing whether or not to bear children allows women to avoid personal responsibility. No one can deny that this idea is a religious view, reflecting religions that are between 1,500 (Islam) and 5,000 (Judaism) years old (Christianity being about 2,000 years old). These religious viewpoints sanctified ideas that were prevalent in ancient societies, adjustments that any religion must make in order to become strong social institutions. The technology of reproductive control changed the very landscape of sexuality and reproduction, but religions were and are unable to adjust: to admit that they were wrong, or even that they're no longer right, weakens their claims to be the only true expression of an infallible supreme deity. Reproductive control technology expands possibilities for women in particular, and societies in general. It's only a means of avoiding responsibility if you insist that sex and pregnancy must be inseparable. Religions are stuck with that idea, societies are not.
4. That a zygote has as many rights as a living person. This is a successful public relations ploy, by religious extremists, to make them appear compassionate in their drive to force their theology on everyone. Government forced birth is vicious, ruthless, and uncaring. In our country, however, individuals may adopt this religious view if they want. They may even force their own daughters to give birth when they're too young, emotionally unequipped, or even when their own daughters are rape or incest victims. But it's a ruthless and uncaring act, make no mistake about it .Merely because people may do this without being criminally prosecuted for child endangerment or abuse, as the law now seems to stand, doesn't make ti any less cruel or loathsome. The laws of the United States, and the laws of the various states, should not be perverted to force this fallacy on everyone.
I've refrained from vilifying you, as many have done on this blog. It was, I confess, my first impulse, but the exchange of ideas is the better route.
Um, only if the one with whom you are "exchanging" is interested in an honest exchange. Maybe you've never seen this post Shooter put on a blog devoted to the discussion of trolling:
(as helpfully posted here on a number of occasions by MaddowBlog commenter Rollo-5302374)
http://moelane.com/2012/06/09/troll-hunting-101/
Definition of trolling:
Your own post was thoughtful, well reasoned and well written. And, to the extent that it was directed at a troll, it was an utter waste of your time and effort. Hope you find this helpful.
D N F T T
Get Enraged and Engaged:
Mooch the Vote 2012!
;-)
Anybody who is surprised by this development is a damn fool. Akin has a month to pull off a victory. McCaskill has been poorly advised to run a Dino campaign. A lot of Democrats don't want to see her or her advisors, but she is our Dino. I don't want McConnell as Majority Leader. Do you? McCaskill is solid on issues of womens health and deserves our support. Romney is going down the toilet so there will be lots of Republican money sloshing around looking to do some evil. Akin is odeous. If Democrats don't rally to defeat his sorry ass we deserve the country he and his ilk will give us. McCaskill needs help. Obama has written Missouri off so she can't count on help from Chicago. She can still win reelection but not without our help.
Easiest prediction I ever made:
Akin thumbs his nose at GOP, stays in Senate race - The Maddow Blog
This is totally not surprising in the least.
And Akin knew that if he stuck in the race he would eventually get the $$ anyway.
*shakes head*
Women of America: WAKE UP AND VOTE.
People like Mr. Akin are ready and very willing to take away your rights.
Satan and I don't agree on everything, but one thing we do agree on is that religion is an evil social construct.
However, I'm not jumping into bed with the devil. He doesn't care what I whine about, I don't care what he whines about...Ultimately unsatisfying, and in the end, it'll burn my ass.
The party bound together by the things they are against is the pity party.
Just consider the sequence:
1) Akin revealed the TeaHaddists for what they really were- ruthless ideologues willing to ruin lives in the name of their ideology. 2) TeaHaddists disowned him because they're ruthless ideologues, and Akin's remarks made that clear to everyone. THEY DISAVOWED HIS PHRASEOLOGY, BUT NOT HIS UNDERLYING POSITION. 3) When they found themselves stuck with him, it was conceptually easy to support him again, because they never disagreed with him in the first place, they were merely embarrassed by his candor and naiveté.
Teahaddists want their theology to rule the country, and eventually the world. Controlling the Senate is a step towards forcing their theology on the country. With no other choice, with a lot of dark money, and in a state where TeaHaddist sentiment is strong, the only negative side to supporting Akin again is the flip-flop aspect. They'll smooth that over with some form of the classic distraction euphemism, "We Misspoke."
The republicans may not have attracted many of a moochy nonmagical crowd of voters with this , so old it is now fashionable , heart warming circle of prodigious principles , but they certainly bring a welling of salty virtue to the eye of particular moral fibre . Please discontinue use if dizzness , an urge to violence , or other inevitable symptoms become inconvenient to deny .
While Akins may lack the subtle touch of mama's boy rep Paul Ryan's christianist soldiers , who long to enter every bedroom as a pride of government moral fibres rectitude research and developement operation , he has the right stuff . This is what makes
It's so easy
It's so easy
It is so easy to say one thing and do another .
Onward christianists soldiers
Plaguing us with wars
Dividing to conquer
Our very own families .
Yay ...
Todd Ryan is to the Republican party as the 47% video is to Romney's true colors.
Shorter GOP: Please vote for this scab so we can use him as a cudgel against Obama
nobody thought they wouldn't support Akin.
Todd made national news with his ignoramus comments on that interview about rape and pregnancies and after the initial shock of such blatant ignorance, a lot of people dismiss it thinking he's just ONE whacko.
I think it would shock a lot of people to know Todd Akin isn't alone, his ideology and his beliefs that he blatantly spews is rampant throughout the south and mid-west. It would be a grave mistake to think it's just in the political arena. There are doctors, lawyers and all kinds of big money people coming after YOUR rights, womens rights. The Todd Akins are the props behind these closeted lunatics!
He's entitled to believe what ever he wants, pixie dust and fairy-tales too, but to have the balls to openly say such things is insanity. Just imagine what's said behind closed doors. Just imagine what their agenda would do if they were to have carte-blanche power over the entire country??
We need to organize sooner rather than later to put a stop to the crazy!
Todd Akin is exhibit A on why the GOTP need to be removed from office and power. The dumbing down of America is a reality, the sheeple really need to be medicated because they are suffering from a delusional schizophrenic episode.
Generations from now will look back on this time and think "there must have been something in the food/water supply that made those people so dayum stoopid!
You might want to go read some Roman history. Start about 70BC and go through to about 10BC - fall of the Republic and rise of the Caesars.
Yes, looking around at the sheeple, I can understand why Rome fell. But I still want to believe that WE can reach them once they're medicated.
The Republicans are returning to support Todd Aiken for only one reason, to try to keep his Senate seat. Having a warm body that will do as he is told is more important than what Aiken said or believes.
Almost, but not quite. He's not in the Senate yet, he's trying to win the seat of the current Senator, Claire McCaskill. Other than that, I agree 100%!
The likelihood of his doing what he's told was pretty slim to begin with and now he can do that thing that Southern white trash morons just love to do: stick their thumb in your eye, which he will do to all those idiots who told him to get out and are now coming back. He'll take their money but he won't take their orders. Ever.
OOPS. So many races, so little time.... :-)
Moral of this story? Don't drink the tea it might lead to blindness.
The difference between Akin and all the "good" Republicans is he says what they think.
Of course the GOP were bluffing, and Akin knew it. They only wanted him out because he was impolite enough to expose their real beliefs to the entire nation. But they care far more about winning elections than being exposed as extremists. So once the deadline passed, they would have no choice but to go ahead and support Akin against McCaskill. That's why Akin refused to budge. He knew perfectly well that the GOP was all piss and wind, and that they would fall into line behind him once they had no choice.
Mitt Romney in August also joined the stampede saying he totally disagreed with what Todd Akin said and that he should get out of the race, and now that the Die is cast and Todd Akin is still in the race, would the media please politely ask Mitt Romney where he now stands on this issue of "Legitimate Rape", is he going to respect,protect and defend women's right or is he with Todd Akin? This should be the nail in Mitt Romney political coffin,no matter how he chooses to answer the the question.
He actually doesn't have to be in their good graces. Since he wouldn't pull out of the race, they have to support him no matter what in the hopes of not losing the seat.
This doesn't have to do with him but I didn't know where else to post this. I hope you read these and are able to at least think about doing this:
Is there any way you could find out exactly how much has been “borrowed” from social security and medicare in the past that hasn’t been paid back? I’ve heard many times that the reason these programs are in any trouble at all is because of the money “borrowed” from them. Both sides have done this and that is part of the “government debt”. So, if they can manipulate it so they change both (or eliminate them!), then they don’t have to pay them back and that amount would reduce the debt. Is that what they are trying to do? We have been paying into both all our lives. They are not entitlements and, if this is what they are trying to do to us so they don’t have to resolve the debt in other ways, I consider that stealing!