News about the female body
 

Everyone knows rapists are repelled by ovulating females....

yeah http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/cry.gif

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/huh.gif http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/faint.gif

What's even more shocking is all of the usual suspects from the Christian Right/GOP rallied around him.

This one may set the world's record for backpedaling.

Um, no.

Most or all of the GOP funders have pulled funding.

Tea party groups are telling him to go.

Hannity:
"As a political observer I see it differently here. I think for the next week all you're going to hear from Democrats is your comments. And, look, I'm a Christian so I believe in forgiveness. And I can just tell by the sound of your voice that you're very sincere in your apology. But I also -- I think there is one political reality that I think has to be faced by you and your campaign and that is that you know, the reality here is that Democrats now have a ton of ammunition and they are now going to try to use these remarks to hurt everybody they can. And if I was put in that position, I would at least be thinking about what is in the best interest of the party. hat is in the best interest of, you know, Mitt Romney in this case. What is in the best interest of the people of Missouri, are they going to be able to hear a campaign about issues or is this going to be the distraction of the campaign. Are you -- you're not even considering that?" Hannity asked. Malkin:

The Todd Akin mess; Updated: “Forgiveness?”

By Michelle Malkin • August 20, 2012 10:01 AM Ugh.

Over the weekend, GOP Rep. Todd Akin — the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Missouri — said some really, really stupid things. (Twitchy has comprehensive coverage. Click here and keep scrolling.)

There’s no sugar-coating or whitewashing this. It wasn’t a “gaffe.” It was ignorant, garbled nonsense. Asked about his views on abortion in the case of rape, he claimed that “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”


Akin’s opponent, incumbent Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill (who is currently 11 points down in the polls), moved in quickly to capitalize on the comments by claiming that Akin was blaming the victims of rape. In the video clip above, however, you’ll note at the end that Akin makes clear that the rapists should be punished, not the victims.

It’s about the only clear, sensible thing he said.

The “legitimate rape” phrase may have been a short-hand way, a la Whoopi Goldberg, of distinguishing between forcible rape and other types of rape or between real and phony claims of rape. Whatever he meant, he made a mess of it.

The cringe-worthiest part of his statement is this: “…the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

I don’t know what kind of biology classes Akin took, but rape-related pregnancies occur with significant frequency. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

I guess there's just the fringe groups, right?

Like the Family Research Council.

Ann Coulter:

Ann Coulter: If Akin loves his country, he will step aside

By: Ann Coulter
8/20/2012 05:24 PM

I won’t hate Todd Akin officially unless he refuses to withdraw from the Missouri Senate race. If he does withdraw, honorably sacrificing his personal interests to save the country, it will be time for all good men to rally around Akin as an American patriot.

Akin was one of nine GOP candidates in the primary to challenge Missouri’s left-wing, tax-cheat sitting Democratic senator, Claire McCaskill. McCaskill is Chuck Schumer in a dress. Totally out of step with the good voters of Missouri, her seat should be an easy win for Republicans this year.

Curiously, Democrats ferociously supported Akin in the GOP primary. McCaskill’s supporters spent $2 million to make Akin her opponent and also crossed over to vote for Akin in the Republican primary – and that’s been admitted in The New York Times.

Now we know why. The rape comment was a totally unforced error on a day that should have been a smashing triumph for the Romney-Ryan ticket.

Akin wasn’t asked some out of the blue question no Republican candidate has ever been asked: He was asked the most jejune, obvious question every Republican is asked in any race for any office. How can a Republican not have an answer for: “What about abortion in the case of rape and incest?”

The point I believe Akin was ultimately driving at was that this is a teeny-tiny percentage of all abortions, so why are we spending all our time taking about it? How about saying: “Yes, it’s still a life, but more people are killed in drive-by shootings in Chicago every year. You give us the 2 million abortions that aren’t a result of rape and incest and we’ll give you the few thousand that are.”

Instead, Akin rambled about “legitimate rape” – violating an ironclad rule of politicians that the word “legitimate” should never appear within 15 yards of the word “rape.” And he talked about the medical possibility of becoming pregnant from a single traumatizing rape.

He’s not a talk radio host. He’s not sitting around shooting the breeze in a college dorm room. This is a politician who should have a clear, nonthreatening answer at the ready for the most cliched question in the MSM’s playbook.

This is no time for another foot-in-the-mouth, Trent Lott Republican to be dominating the national political discussion. The country is at stake.

That's a bit... overwrought, is it not?

"If he does withdraw, honorably sacrificing his personal interests to save the country, it will be time for all good men to rally around Akin as an American patriot." "The country is at stake."


x-post

x-you'd

Depends on your point of view.

If you belive Obama & Co. are destroying the country, and that Akin could lose us the Senate and drag Missouri's 11 electoral votes along for good measure, it's not that far afield.

If you believe that Obama & Co. are any more or less inclined or adept at destroying the country, economically speaking, than Romney & Co., then you are beyond medical and psychological help, or even diagnosis.

Which, given the patient at hand (Ms. Coulter), is bleeding obvious.


x-ed again. Imma hang up and listen.

I didn't refer to the whole of the RNC. I referred to the usual suspects of the Christian Right/GOP (like the FRC) which have, indeed, rallied around him.

Aaaaaand.....he's still in the lead.*

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/...uri-senate-ra/

The poll by Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling found that Mr. Akin, a Republican, maintains a lead of 44 percent to 43 percent over the Democratic senator. *I'm sure there's an error bar in there that says I can't say that, but oh well.

Shame the GOP don't agree.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1818532.html

So let me get this straight--you think that we shouldn't have abortions, but they are okay for rape? Are children of rape somehow less of a person than other children?

Plomp doesn't want to force his own personal beliefs on other people who believe differently.

And a fetus cannot ever be a child anyway, if the fetus is aborted.

Yes, that would be my objection to abortion. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...nwitdornan.gif

I don't see how he is wrong.

JM
(Of course, doesn't excuse Akin's craziness and might mean that many of those who think similarly to me do so for the wrong reasons.)

I've seen two broad justifications for an "abortion is permissible in the case of rape/incest" clause:

1. The person supporting the clause wants to punish promiscuous women with an abortion ban, and since victims of rape aren't at fault for being pregnant then it's okay for them to have abortions. The welfare of the unborn child is irrelevant. For example, on the topic of a rape/incest exception clause, Slowwhand says 2. The person supporting the clause is not 100% certain that their opposition to abortion is correct. Just to make some numbers up, let's say that you're only 95% certain that your opposition to abortion is correct - in that case you're willing to allow an exception to a ban if the mother's life is at risk. If you're 80% certain that your opposition to abortion is correct then you're willing to allow an exception for rape. If you're 60% certain then you don't oppose a ban, though you do oppose state insurance coverage for abortion. Etc.