Earlier today, the Republican National Convention approved a plank in their platform advocating for the passage of the "Human Life Amendment," which would ban abortion in all circumstances, even in cases of rape or incest so the best thing you can say about Aikin is that at least he is up front about where he stands.
In the fight to push for their agenda to end a woman's right to choose they have used wacko theories from a Doctor Wilkie that claimed that a woman's body would naturally reject the sperm from a rape. This is not something that Aikin mispoke it is part of the playbook.
similarly the Family Research Council uses pseudo sciience to say all gays are pedophiles and bad parents.
Last year on Family Research Council President Tony Perkins' radio show, Akin said, "The heart of liberalism really is a hatred for God."
Akins and King represent the worst type of culture wars divisiveness that demonizes half this country.
The FRC has advocated for the death penalty against gays in Africa.
The FRC is listed as an important endorsement on Aikins website.
Is he really pro-life? Can he fairly represent the people
He was on Levin's show recently and said he was on the Dim's hit list; he expected to need at least 3x more campaign $$$ than he has needed in the past to put up a good fight.
It doesn't surprise me that the media has nothing else to talk about just now. The Reeps need to have a stock answer to deflect them.
What really bugs me is that until 0 care, the feds never did fund abortion. The gov't wasn't in anyone's bedroom for a reason. Now anyone who is pro-life is being beat up because the Dems insist they play around in everyone's personal business from contraceptives to abortion.
Hey, I'm usually disgusted when he right doesn't stand up for its own. But the reason the right screws this up is the same old thing: no mental discipline.
It takes discipline to use words correctly. For example, some fairly prominent people on the right still call illegal aliens "migrants." Some might be migrants, but the vast majority are not migrants at all, they are illegal aliens, pure and simple. Leaders on the right should have the discipline to always refer to the issue as an "illegal alien problem," not "illegal immigration," or worse, "immigration." Those are the left's terms, and using them lets the left control the debate.
Discipline works both ways, though. We don't need a hemming and hawing over "Macaca" type incidents. This TPM hack job was a smear against Rep. King, and we should have his back, period. That's the disciplined approach, because he was correct.
(The right should have had Trent Lott's back over his comments on Strom Thurmond's birthday, even though Lott was really a beltway guy, and not a strong, conservative leader. Lott's comments were not some statement of fact or principle, they were just some words of support for a man who was already retired. You don't let the other side force your guy to retire for such a minor mistake, and let them keep a guy like Joe, "Serial Plagarist" Biden on the job. Lott shouldn't have issued an apology, either.)
(Our side should not have caved over the nasty edit job by Couric in her Palin interview. There should have been calls from Republican leaders for Couric to resign, the very next day. Palin didn't issue an apology. She has better mental discipline.)
You don't cede this space to the left anymore. You fight for it.
But there are some rules. Most of them are pretty vague, on the order of "don't screw up too badly." But some are bright-line obvious, like "don't get caught making sh*t up."
Akin got caught making sh*t up. BONUS: he got caught making sh*t up over a highly charged, major issue. He'll lose the election over this, and he should know it. I have to agree with Romney on this, because Akin's ship has sailed. It's over the horizon. Akin needs to get out with little fanfare and let the process work.
Watch what happens with Romney's first SCOTUS appointment, though. Some minor charge will crop up, and the right will cave over it, and he or she will withdraw.
All I can say is that all of the Republicans running for office had better get your ideas on rape solidified right this second. This will not go away. if you are pro life then say so. No qualifications necessary. The media will not let this go. The law of the land is abortion. Figure it out now and make sure it is coherent. That is all.
"All Republicans" are not required to get their "ideas" on rape, or anything else, "solidified". Members of the Republican party are not lockstep followers of a one-dimensional talking point. The GOP does not, and should not, tell its members HOW or WHAT to think or say. There are many pro-abortion Republicans, even though the party's official stance is one of pro-life. Republicans are free to say and think what they wish on each and every subject, and OTHER Republicans are free to utterly reject their positions, statements and entire campaigns, as has been done in the case of Akin. We don't need to walk in lockstep, nor do we need to accept the outrageous statements such as Akin's.
The TRUTH is, there is some merit to what Akin said in that if we are going to say abortion is wrong EXCEPT in cases of rape, well then, someone, somewhere, at sometime is going to HAVE to define what specifically qualifies as a rape that merits a state-sanctioned abortion, ie. a "legitimate" rape. Do statutory rapes, those defined as rape only as a matter of consent laws rather than by force or violence, do they merit abortion as well? It is a question that must be addressed, and Akin addressed it. That said, he needs to get out NOW. He IS going to cost the GOP control of the Senate. THAT said, the GOP needs to quit going weak in the knees over its own positions and get out there and make the -pro-life case.
Reading King's updated comments I have to say is the left is desperate and is rolling out the smear machine as we speak. akin needs to drop due to that alone.
I think that it is a good thing to have this debate. RS, one should rightly wonder what is the difference of "rape" in this bill. If one desires to be honest, why is it okay to kill the innocent child who is not at fault in the first place. The baby is a life no matter how it came about, it is not the child's fault for the father's sin.
The father should pay dearly and rightly so. The child needs and deserves to live. He is a creation of God is he not? Or are only children produced through "legal" means God's creation?
Why would anyone try to argue for the most illogical position: Abortion is killing an innocent child, unless it is rape, then that which is in the womb is not a child?
I've never understood why conservatives are on the defensive about this. Take the argument to them. "Why do you want to kill children?"... then let their arguments implode. But no... conservatives afraid of being called a bad name.
If abortion is wrong because the life being taken is a human child, growing in the womb, then abortion is wrong in each and every pregnancy, even when conceived by forcible rape. A mitigating circumstance, such as an ectopic pregnancy in which the mother's life is at risk, and the baby's ultimately too, should be held as a medical decision. Obviously, when two lives are at risk, you save the most viable, in this case the mother's.
The problem with this entire firestorm is that the left and independents and establishment Republicans all have their own reasons for capitalizing on the furor, which they helped create, over Akin's comments. And conservatives, sad to say, are afraid to hold their ground. It's a pathetic spectacle, and a depressing commentary on America's moral bankruptcy.
If Akin doesn't get out, WE can't win the senate and then we can't repeal Obamacare or put up conservative judges and we can lose Missouri, Obama lost 4 years ago by less the 1% ... This one f-ck is putting everything into risk because he a greedy dummy, if he thinks he will win after this he's boardline mentally disabled.
where's the leadership in the RNC telling every single campaign person that's on Akin's team that if they don't quit they will never work for a republican campaign in Missouri or nationally.
Who says he can't win. The libs...? He said something stupid he did not do something stupid. Even with what he said he can still beat the lib. he is running against. I am a women and what he said is not a big deal.
So, you've never misspoken and misunderstood anything? Besides, Maobama and the marxists are only half of this country's problems. The olther half is the republican establishment which isn't vastly different from the DNC. They both want to tell us how to spend our money.
Really? Missourians are that dumb that they cannot see through the media spin on this? Man, if that is the case, there is no hope.
Breaking News is Akins isn't leaving. And Huckabee is the Butch Cassidy to his Sundance Kidd. The media is going to tie ANY Republican to these two supreme morons.
Claire McCaskill and a second term would be a blessing if it ended there. But it won't. This will destroy Romney/Ryan and the women's vote. Probably get Obama/Biden re-elected as well.
You forget that "We the People" are smart enough to figure out what is what. Truth from lies. Have some faith.