Concern Troll Claire McCaskill Still Supports Her Handpicked Opponent Todd Akin

Missouri Republican Senate candidate Rep. Todd Akin seems to have permanently derailed his campaign with this inane performance during an interview broadcast Sunday on KTVI-TV in St. Louis.

Answering a question about abortion in the case of rape, Akin said, “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist.” Akin later backtracked on that statement, but the damage was done.

Republicans raced to distance themselves from Akin, with more and more calling for him to step aside. The pressure from Republicans is sure to increase as tomorrow is the deadline for his name to easily be replaced on the November ballot. A GOP aide told the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin that Akin is on his own. Akin was told he “gets no assistance, no money, no surrogate” by party officials.

The one person who wants him to stay in the race is his opponent Sen. Claire McCaskill. This shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, as McCaskill’s millions are responsible for Akin winning at three-way runoff election in August.

Bankrolling Akin’s primary victory wasn’t enough, she’s now added concern troll to her resume. Here’s what she told Huffington Post today:

WASHINGTON — Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) warned top Republican officials on Monday that any efforts to push Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) out of the Senate race against her, following his galling remarks about “legitimate” rape victims not getting pregnant, would backfire.

“I think for Washington party insiders to come in and try to invalidate the votes of Missourians would be radical,” McCaskill said in a phone interview with The Huffington Post. “I think that would be a very radical thing to have happen, and I can’t imagine how the Republican primary voters would think about that in Missouri.”

“I think there would be a significant backlash,” she added. “I’m not sure that would have a good ending for the Republican Party.”

How thoughtful of the sitting duck Senator to be so concerned about the feelings of Missouri Republicans…

McCaskill wants Akin in the race, even though she trails him in the polls because based on a comparison to past mid-campaign scandals, she stands an excellent chance of overcoming Akin’s current advantage.

Take away Akin and his “legitimate rape” controversy and McCaskill will lose her best chance to defend the seat she was almost certain to lose last week. That’s a call for the folks in Missouri, but either businessman John Brunner or former state treasurer Sarah Steelman would stand an excellent chance to unseat McCaskill.

Tuesday ought to be very interesting in this fast-moving story…

Possibly The Worst Impromptu Presser Ever
Obama's Constant BS About Thomas Jefferson and Islam
  • GarandFan

    Akin should just have said, “Pardon me, I just had a Joe Biden moment – what other people call a “brain fart”. Let’s see the MSM deal with that.

    • ackwired

      LOL… I thought of Biden, too, when I heard about this. It’s always fun when a politician slips up and says what he really believes.

      • jim_m

        The difference is that a lot of dems believe like Biden. The evidence is already in that no one believes like Akin.

        • Brucehenry

          And I would refer you to a list of influential conservatives I posted a little bit downthread that have either endorsed or excused Akin’s remarks.

  • He should call Whoopi Goldberg to once again define the difference between “rape” and “rape rape”.

  • Meanwhile, up here in Minnesota, a Democrat is very nearly getting a free pass after being caught engaging in homosexual sex acts with a minor. Kerry Gauthier has not been charged with any crime after the July incident (which took place at a public rest stop) because the minor was 17 and the age of consent here is 16. There are pretty weak calls from his own party for him to step down, but it hasn’t happened so far and I doubt it will. So I guess when you’re a Republican, if you use your mouth to say something stupid, it can cost you your job, but when you’re a Democrat, you can use your mouth to engage in a sex act with a minor and you don’t have to worry too much about your job.

    • Hank_M

      I hadn’t heard about this.
      Seems far worse than what the idiot Akin said.
      But suddenly, Akin is national news and Gauthier…..not so much.

      • Brucehenry

        Maybe because Akin is a US Senate candidate and a US Congressman and Gauthier is a state legislator?

        • Hank_M

          You could be right. I’m just not inclined to give the folks who brought us the “name that party” game, the benefit of the doubt.

  • Commander_Chico

    This guy Akin is the Tea Party candidate, isn’t he?

    • Evil Otto

      Nice try, idiot. Many Tea Partiers supported Akin’s opponent Steelman in the primary, and the Tea Party Express has called for Akin to quit.

      The Tea Party Express endorsed Akin’s rival, former state treasurer
      Sarah Steelman, in Missouri’s GOP primary. Steelman, who was defeated by
      Akin in the August 7 contest, also grabbed the coveted conservative
      endorsement of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

      There is no single “Tea Party” for Akin to be a candidate of, so your sad attempt to link him to it is not going to work.

      • Commander_Chico

        Well he is a member of the “Tea Party Caucus” in Congress.

        • Evil Otto

          …and? Nothing you just wrote contradicts anything I wrote.

          I’m wondering something, Chico… what the hell point are you trying to make? Are you implying that the Tea Party endorses Akin’s comments? That any support he got from Tea Partiers was unconditional?

          Ah, I get it, it’s just your usual bullsh*t. Akin makes vile, idiotic statement. Akin is a member of Tea Party Caucus. Thus: What, exactly?

          If you have a point to make, Chico, make it. Don’t play your usual game.

          • Commander_Chico

            My point is that Akin is one of those Tea Party nutballs.

          • Gee, and Chico sill I wager is going to claim to be something oither than a lefty despite his near 100% record of riding in too their aid on attacks.

          • Evil Otto

            That’s not a “point.” Again, as I’ve pointed out, many Tea Partiers did not endorse him, and the head of the Tea Party Express has called for him to quit.

            Try again, idiot. I’m going to ask this again:

            1) Are you implying that the Tea Party endorses Akin’s comments?

            2) Are you implying any support he got from Tea Partiers was unconditional?

            Answer the questions, hack.

            As for the “nutballs” comment, well, coming from a nutball like you that’s not much of an insult. For you to call anyone a nutball is like getting a lecture on temperance from Lindsay Lohan.

          • Brucehenry

            I can’t speak for Chico, but I saw a poll this morning that suggests support for Akin is pretty much unchanged since his remarks — it looks like the Tea Party DOES support him. Unless you’re implying that, because of those remarks, your average Tea Party voter is switching their support to McCaskill.

          • Evil Otto

            I can’t speak for Chico,

            Why not? Is there a difference between you two?

            but I saw a poll this morning that suggests
            support for Akin is pretty much unchanged since his remarks — it looks
            like the Tea Party DOES support him.

            So… a single poll. That’s your evidence tying Akin to the Tea Party. Who did the poll? (I already know the answer, because I’ve seen the poll.) Was it a poll of Tea Party members? When was it taken? Are a majority of his voters Tea Party members?

            C’mon, Bruce, this is weak, and you know it.

            Unless you’re implying that,
            because of those remarks, your average Tea Party voter is switching
            their support to McCaskill.

            Nice False Dilemma fallacy you’ve got going there. Is this an either/or? Failing to support a candidate does not automatically imply support for his Democrat rival. It is likely that Akin will quit today, in which case much (not all, but much) of his support will move to McCaskill’s new Republican opponent. This may result in McCaskill winning. If Akin doesn’t quit, he will receive little or nothing in the way of support from either Tea Party organizations or from the Republicans and will likely get curb stomped.

            Look, I know you guys think you’ve got something on the hated Tea Party, but this isn’t going to work. Akin is toast no matter what happens. Get back to me when the Tea Party endorses his comments or continues to support him after them. If you can’t do that, stop playing this dishonest game… because, believe me, I can play too. Liberals provide mountains of vile statements for me to link to your side.

          • Commander_Chico

            Look, this guy Akin just openly said what these fundie nutballs think about abortion. They want to outlaw it in all cases, and know that a rape exception will just lead to a lot of women claiming rape, when in truth they just had a one-night stand.

            So they rationalize their beliefs with the stuff that Akin said.

          • Jwb10001

            Please tell me Chico how many conservatives have to denouce this guy to satisfy you?

          • jim_m

            No he said what he thought about abortion. don’t think that everyone who disagrees with abortion agrees with him.

          • Brucehenry

            Well, Tea Party-supported Paul Ryan cosponsored, with Todd Akin, a pretty radical “personhood” bill that would have outlawed, on a Federal level, abortion for any reason including rape.

            Tea Party hero Erick Erickson, FRC leader Tony Perkins, conservative commenters Chris and Dana Loesch, AFA honcho Bryan Fischer, and Glenn Reynolds have all issued statements either supporting or excusing Akin’s remarks. I realize that none of those people have a position in any organization with “Tea Party” in its name, but I think you’d agree that all of them are more philosophically inclined toward Tea Party positions than McCaskill’s. And that all have at least some influence on many Tea Party voters.

            I’ll ask in a different way: Do you think that, if Akins DOES remain in the race, many Tea Party voters will either switch their vote to McCaskill or stay home? I don’t.

          • Jwb10001

            You constantly get pissy any time someone attempts to play this guilt by association game but here you are playing like a pro. What a surprise that you would again show both your standards at one time.

          • Brucehenry

            Define “getting pissy” and give an example of me doing so.

          • Jwb10001

            No the new standard is you have to prove your not, after all you’re a progressive, you’re side set the standard now live by it….

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah, that’s what I thought, you’re full of shit.

          • Jwb10001

            oh don’t get pissy Bruce you might prove my point

          • Brucehenry

            Sentences begin with a capital letter, lol.

            You’re not good at this, dude. You should just lurk.

          • Jwb10001

            thanks Bruce I was never very good at grammer I’m so glad someone is there to help me with that. You’re not very good at the guilt by association game you should give that up. You are however, the very best at nit picking that you should take up as a profession.

          • Brucehenry

            You’re also not much at backing up your accusations. Like “you constantly get pissy” or “here you are playing [this guilt by association game] like a pro.”

            Or spelling, or punctuation. Not that those matter, unless you want to be taken seriously.

          • Jwb10001

            yes Bruce you’re right grammer is way important. I will attempt to do better, I would hate to get any more black marks from teacher. i don’t have to back up my accusations, don’t you keep up with your sides rules? someone that reads this blog told me that you get pissy so you have to prove otherwise. remember your guru alinski? you’re side is setting up the rules of the game, it’s past time both sides had to play by them. so I anxioulsy await your proof that you’re not pissy when called to task on you bs by the way did i do better with my grammer this time?

          • Brucehenry

            I rest my case.

          • Jwb10001

            oh now this is a case you’re no longer my teacher you’re the prosecuting attorney? by the way in a post just above you associated this numb skull to Paul Ryan, Tony Perkins, Eric Erikson, and all of them to the tea party. what was the point of that, if not to hang this idiots remarks around the neck of everyone that dissagrees with you? now please don’t get pissy but seriously do you still insist that you don’t play the guilt by assocciation game? or is my grammer so poor that you just can’t lower yourself to answering?

          • Brucehenry

            LOL who’s getting pissy now? I’m sowwy I hurt you feefees.

          • Jwb10001

            really? you make me laugh, please don’t project your pissiness on to me I’m not at all pissy, I just asked a simple question. i could careless if you want to own up to your bull shit or not. i just like watching you act like you’re so much better than everyone else. I’ll leave you alone now since an idiot that can’t spell and doesn’t understand grammer making you look so bad must be making you really pissy.

          • Brucehenry

            OK, bye!

          • Jwb10001

            that’s rich…. don’t project your pissiness on me. I could care less if you want to own up to your BS or not. I just love watching you act like you’re so much better than everyone else.

          • Jwb10001

            oh now you’re going to try comedy? give it up Bruce you can’t get under my skin. I just love the baby talk too it fits you so well, condecention is so becoming, it looks especially good on you…. LOL see I did a little LOL so you wouldn’t get confused and think I’m taking anythying you say seriously.

          • jim_m

            Sentences begin with a capital letter

            So do proper nouns but there is nothing proper about obama.

          • jim_m

            There’s a good example of you getting pissy! You let him goad you into it.

          • Jwb10001

            any time Warner posts something you can find a number of examples of Bruce nit picking (gold tooth) and getting pissy.

          • Brucehenry

            Haha the “gold tooth” thing wasn’t nitpicking — it was an outright lie that everyone could see, but I was the only one who called him on it. Not one of you conservative Real Men could even bother to say, “Umm, excuse me, what gold tooth?”

            And yes, I will confess, I’ve kinda made it my mission to point out Warner’s ….umm…inaccuracies. Like “Dan Savage is Obama’s Bullying Czar” or “Ray Bradbury Slams Obama’s Era of Big Government” or “SWATting is a tool of the left,” all statements made by Warner without foundation in truth, or very freaking little.

          • Brucehenry

            Well, I asked him to define it. If that’s how you define it, I guess I own it. Whatever.

          • jim_m

            😉 Sucks when you find yourself to be no better than me

          • Brucehenry

            Haha, when have I ever claimed to be better than you? Saner, maybe, not better.

          • jim_m


          • jim_m


            I searched Instapundit for comments and he has not supported Akin’s remarks. He has referred to it as one of the dumbest things ever said.

            The WAPO says: Do NOT accuse CNN and Breitbart commentator Dana Loesch of defending Missouri congressman-cum-Mr. Legitimate Rape Todd Akin. If you do, you’re dumb.

            Erich Erickson has claimed basically that McCaskill would still be a worse Senator, but has also declared that Akin will never be one.

            You are full of crap about your allegations which is typical for an uninformed lefty.

          • Jwb10001

            But Bruce doesn’t play the guilt by association game. He also never gets pissy.

          • Brucehenry

            Erickson excused Akin’s remark as simply “inarticulate” and then accused President Obama of being pro-infanticide, saying “I’ll take Todd Akin’s inarticulate response over an infanticide supporter any day of the week.”

            Chris Loesch wrote that Akin’s comments were “medically correct.” That will come a surprise to the 32,000 or so women who are impregnated by their rapists each year. Dana excused Akin by saying his comments were less bad than McCaskill’s record by “any real standard of measurement.”

            Glenn Reynold’s excuse for Akin’s remarks is that they “pale in comparison to Whoopi Goldberg’s.”

            Tony Perkins of AFA said that they “support [Akin] fully and completely.” while Fischer of FRC says “Todd Akin is right; physical trauma of forcible rape can interfere with hormonal production, conception.”

            No, the Loesches, Erickson, and Reynolds aren’t exactly defending Akin’s remarks — just excusing them. Only Akin’s fellow religious fanatics Perkins and Fischer are outright defending them.

          • jim_m

            Pointing out that the left has ignored equally offensive statements is not a defense of those statements. You can cherry pick individual statements and falsely accuse people of defending Akin. The left is good at that as it is a supremely dishonest tactic.

            You need to look at the whole of their comments. You’re not and it seems deliberately so.

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah, I’ll bet you read Biden’s whole “chains” speech over and over to be sure you understood it in context. And that’s probably why you INSISTED the “you didn’t build that” thing was proof that Obama is a socialist.

          • jim_m

            I didn’;t read Biden’s whole speech, but I have heard enough of his other racist remarks to know that he meant the slur.

            I have gone round and round with the full context of the obama gaffe. You won’t admit that he was repeating the same words as Warren and as Lakoff. Lakoff’s words are indisputable as his academic research is all about socialism.

            You’re just to ignorant and ideological to admit the point.

          • jim_m

            I seem to recall Whoopi Goldberg recounting how she was upset that her daughter chose not to have an abortion. She was unhappy because she saw choice as choosing to have an abortion and not choosing to have a baby. She saw her daughter’s choice as a betrayal of her ideas. You don’t have to go far to find a lefty whose ideas about tolerance and choice are “do as I say and STFU”. You probably only need to find a mirror.

            The left says a lot of offensive things. You apparently are bothered by the fact that the left says things as bad or worse than Akins and it bothers you to have that pointed out.

          • jim_m

            Bruce: If people on the left can say repugnant things and the left never bats an eye, why is it wrong to point out that when someone on the right says a repugnant thing that you are being a hypocrite?

            The right has come out emphatically against Akin. The left never corrects their own. You need to cherry pick quotes to make your claim. You cannot find anyone from the left to correct their idiots.

            Quit bitching about a tiny minority who support Akin and start looking at your own idiots. What you dislike is being called out for hypocrisy. It’s not likely to stop anytime soon given that you’re still doing it.

          • Brucehenry

            LOL, Jim, did you READ the WaPo article you linked to?!

          • jim_m

            The less intelligent can spin that I’m defending his speech. I’m attacking your hypocritical overreactions. Get it right.

            Did you? That has been my point to in response to your BS. I suppose this is you self identifying as “less intelligent”.

          • Evil Otto

            Backpedaling, Bruce? What a shock. Now it’s a few conservatives who have supposedly “issued statements either supporting or excusing Akin’s remarks?” (and I’m wondering what the hell you’re even talking about in the case of Reynolds).

            I would note that you have failed to mention the numerous conservatives and Republicans who have openly and loudly called for Akins to quit. Are they somewhat inconvienient to your narrative, Bruce? You and that kook Chico are desperately trying to find a link between the Tea Party and Akin’s remarks, because it confirms what you really think of us. You’re not going to let a little problem like reality get in the way of that.

            And to answer your leading question, no. We’re not going to stay home… because we on the right don’t give a shit about Akins, in the end. We care about OBAMA, and that is why we Tea Partiers will be showing up at the polls in record numbers. You want to somehow turn that into support for Akins, and from that into support for his statement.

            By the way, I’m still wondering why you on the left support sex with underage boys. C’mon, Bruce, I’m merely holding you to the same standard that you demand of my side.

          • Brucehenry

            That was the first comment I made on this thread, 7 hours ago as I type this, so how is that “backpedaling?”

            I never denied that many, perhaps most, conservatives are calling for Akin to quit. However, it seems to me that most don’t want him to quit BECAUSE he’s a Neanderthal misogynist — they’re fine with that — it’s just that declaring himself one so openly puts what looked like an easy victory in jeopardy.

            BTW remind me again of how the GOP leadership ostracized Vitter and Craig.

          • Evil Otto

            You were backpedaling because you shifted arguments from ‘The Tea Party supports him’ (“I saw a poll this morning that suggests support for Akin is pretty much unchanged since his remarks — it looks like the Tea Party DOES support him.”) to a vague link (“I realize that none of those people have a position in any organization with “Tea Party” in its name, but I think you’d agree that all of them are more philosophically inclined toward Tea Party positions than McCaskill’s.”). Now you’re even backing off from that.

            I never denied that many, perhaps most, conservatives are calling for Akin to quit.

            (Capslock on) YOU NEVER MENTIONED IT EITHER. That’s lying by omission, Bruce. It was inconvenient to your point, which was that the Tea Party supported him, when it’s clear that neither the Tea Party, nor most conservative leaders/commenters, nor most in the GOP support him. That’s kind of important.

            However, it seems to me that most don’t want him to quit BECAUSE he’s a Neanderthal misogynist — they’re fine with that — it’s just that declaring himself one so openly puts what looked like an easy victory in jeopardy.

            When I read crap like that, I wonder why I even bother with you. “It seems” that way to you, does it? It’s “clear,” is it?

            This actually reinforces MY point about you and that cretin Chico, Bruce: this is the way you see us. You think we’re a bunch of neanderthal misogynists, racists, and homophobes. You’re like the Shadow, with the supernatural power to see what evil lurks in the hearts of conservatives. You just know that we all secretly want him to stay in… and no amount of evidence will prove otherwise.

          • Brucehenry

            Who is this “us”? Just you, Otto. And you’re an ANGRY one, too!

            No, seriously, you’re right, that was my second comment, not my first, and I guess I can see where you think you have your “AHA!! GOTCHA! BACKPEDALING!” So I’ll concede that, in your mind, I’m supposed to present YOUR side of the argument as well as my own.

            I never said you want him to stay in the race, never implied it, although of course I didn’t say you DIDN’T want him to stay in the race, so I’m dishonest, or something. Perfectly logical. Is my face red, or what?!

            My point was that your average Tea Party supporter will, indeed, vote for Akin, as it now appears he will stay in the race. I stand by that, though of course it’s only my opinion. And that those specific folks I mentioned did, indeed, say things that either excused or endorsed what Akin said. Just those two points, not much more.

            BTW, I wouldn’t want you to stay up nights wondering why you bother with me. I’ll be fine without your tutelage, so if it’s too much trouble, just don’t bother. I’ll muddle through somehow.

          • Evil Otto

            Who is this “us”? Just you, Otto.

            I’m a Tea Partier, as I’ve mentioned before. As are many, if not most of the conservatives on Wizbang. That’s the “us.” When you imply that the Tea Party secretly wants to support Akin, you’re saying that the people here, in fact, the people in the conservative movement, secretly want to support him.

            I wouldn’t want you to stay up nights wondering why you bother with me.

            I don’t really wonder. I’ll tell you why, Bruce… because every once in a while you claw your way back from mindless Democrat talking points. This is not one of those times. This time you’re being disingenuous, applying the broad brush against the Tea Party, and utterly ignoring any evidence that proves you wrong. Your opinion is ill-formed, and you seem to be happy that way.

          • Brucehenry

            Well, here’s how I see it. Up until this weekend, the Tea Party voters of Missouri had gotten over their disappointment that Palin’s candidate had lost to Akin, and had pretty much lined up behind him, as opposed to McCaskill. Plus, he is, indeed, a member of Michele Bachmann’s “Tea Party Caucus” in the House.

            Then came Akin’s colossal gaffe, and Akin’s prominent supporters started bailing on him. (Except for the ones I mentioned.) But, according to the poll you and I both saw this morning, his support among the electorate was pretty much unchanged!

            Now, do you suppose that Tea Party voters had turned away from him in disgust, and WERE REPLACED BY SOME OTHER GROUP OF VOTERS? Or do you think that Tea Party voters, like yourself, just didn’t give a shit about his misogyny, because repealing Obamacare, the Great Society, and the fucking New Deal is more important than having a Senator who knows his ass from his elbow?

            You admit yourself that getting rid of Obama (and by extension, I suppose, Obamacare) is more important than what this candidate says or does. Now that the deadline has passed, and Akin will stay in the race, what do you wanna bet that the Tea Party, AND YOU, comes around?

            I’m sure that many of you Tea Party types are sincerely appalled at what Akin said, especially those with daughters (I hope). But you’re not appalled enough to NOT VOTE for him. I guarantee you that if YOU live in Missouri, YOU’RE voting for him. Do you deny it?

            EDIT: I know it comforts you to think that everyone who disagrees with you is a mindless automaton who spews “lefty talking points,” but other people have legitimate points of view, Otto, and don’t deserve scorn or derision for having them. a little sarcasm? Sure, go for it. But calling people “idiots” and “cretins” because they espouse political viewpoints that differ from yours is unAmerican, Mr Patriot.

          • jim_m

            Is there a difference between you two?

            I’d say the difference is that Bruce is honest about being a leftist and chico tends to wrap himself in the flag and claim that anyone who has not served in the military should not be allowed to speak on national defense issues. I think that is about it.

          • Evil Otto
          • Seen their women? (Shudder…)

          • jim_m

            No. The TEA Party Express has called for his withdrawal. And as Otto says the TEA Party is not an organization but a movement So as a whole it really does not endorse candidates.

            You also forget that there is a difference between advocating for someone and saying that even a seriously flawed imbecile like Akin is better than the corruptocrat McCaskill.

          • Jwb10001

            It’s not just the tea party that’s calling for him to get out, hell you’ve got Hannity and Levin calling his remarks stupid, insulting etc. It seems no one supports what this guy said. But that doesn’t stop our friends from playing the guilt by association game. Given they all seem to support Obama and he told one huge wopper of a lie yesterday by their standards what does that make them?

          • Jwb10001

            So the tea party are nut balls because this guy said something stupid? So does that make the democrats nut balls because Joe Biden says stupid stuff every day?

          • jim_m

            The point is that calling yourself a member of something and actually being a member are two different things. Akin would like to claim the association with the TEA Party but it has not been given him. Like most idiot leftists who know nothing, you leap to ascribe anything negative to the TEA Party without thinking. (Perhaps the without thinking was unnecessary. As a leftist you do everything without thinking.)

        • Jwb10001

          That comment shows how little you understand about the tea party.

  • Commander_Chico

    In the end, you either allow abortion or you agree with Akin.

    I won’t even say “in cases of rape,” framing it in that way just means women will have to say they were raped.

    • False equivalence.

      I believe abortion needs to be legal. I also think, since holding my son at birth, that it’s not something that needs to be encouraged. And I think Akin’s a fool for even getting into the argument.

      Making abortion a central issue in this election is a damn stupid thing. It’s the equivalent of fighting about the finish of the kitchen appliances (“Gloss black!” “No, stainless steel!”) while the house is burning down. It needs to be put aside while dealing with the major problem – not serve as a focal point.

      In the grand scheme of things, it’s negligible except as an emotional issue. It won’t bankrupt the country, it won’t destroy the country – it can be dealt with later. (Much later. Let me put it on the schedule… does 2045, early July work for you? Fine, let’s talk about it then.)

      But politics are more emotion-driven than reason-driven any more, aren’t they? Practicality and reality be damned – the vote goes to the bastard that can tug at the emotions best and promise remedies that sound good. Whether they can be delivered, and whether or not they’ll work as labeled is, again, something else entirely.

      • Brucehenry

        But many conservatives and religious folk see abortion as murder. I doubt they wish to put off discussion of the issue until 2045.

        • jim_m

          Some see it still as a moral issue rather than a legal one. You cannot force morality down people’s throats you have to persuade them. The solution to abortion is not to force something on one side like the court did with Roe v Wade. That is why we have the problem we have today.

          Heck, by 2045 the left will have aborted itself into extinction. Suits me fine.

          • Moral issue, legal issue – it doesn’t much matter. Like it or not, it’s currently the law – and if some voter with their panties in a wad over it puts that over economic survival as a nation, then… well, that’s their choice.

          • Hugh_G

            You sound like a liberal. Which proves you are a very confused person.

          • jim_m

            Then allow me to be more specific. God does not care if you do the right thing for the wrong reasons. The right could ram antiabortion laws down everyone’s throats but it would do no good. Until people are persuaded of the sanctity of life the effort would be meaningless.

            Ultimately, you could outlaw abortion here but people would find a way to get it done. Go watch the movie “In the Heat of the Night” for proof of that truth. It is not about the law it is about the hearts and minds of the people. When you win over the people the law won’t matter.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes, because if you want to see proof of a moral truth, go see a movie starring Sidney Poitier. 😉

          • jim_m

            I’m thinking of the end where the plot hinges on the fact that people could get illegal abortions. My point is that you can outlaw abortion but it still doesn’t go away.

          • Hugh_G

            Well I respectfully disagree but respect your view.

        • That’s their right to see it like that, and I can’t say I disagree all that much with their point of view.

          But that’s irrelevant.

          There’s more important issues on the table at this point. Make sure the country continues, THEN worry about social issues. I don’t see Roe v. Wade overturned. If they don’t like abortion, they can work within the system to get it overturned… but you need a system that can be worked in for that to happen.

          • Brucehenry

            Wow, Lawson.

            You don’t disagree “all that much” with the point of view that abortion IS murder, but that’s not all that important? The idea that babies are being murdered doesn’t matter as much as getting rid of the capital gains tax?

            I don’t agree with them, but even I wouldn’t characterize someone who sincerely believes abortion is murder as having “their panties in a wad.”

            And, let’s see, gay people deserve equal rights, but you don’t really care if they get those rights or not (IIRC, that was the gist of your thinking when we discussed the whole Chick-fil-A brouhaha). You don’t care “which way your plumbing points,” therefore it’s OK to deny gay people the same right to marriage and family that straight people enjoy.
            No wonder you’re a Romney supporter.

          • As I said – abortion is legal. Whether it’s moral or ethical can be hashed out in society and then legislated one way or another. At this point, that’s ALL that can be done. I’m not going to make it the centerpiece of my political philosophy.

            Check back with me in 2045. We’ll talk about it then.

            Gay rights is another issue that is being handled socially, and locally. The issue is being brought to vote. It’s an ‘I don’t really care’ issue. I’ll probably vote for gay marriage if it’s ever on the ballot here, unless some idiot (hint, hint) gets into my face and tries to harangue me into voting for it, in which case I’ll probably vote against it. Or flip a coin. It’ll depend on how pissed off I get. If all 50 states decide they’ll honor gay marriages done in other states, then I’ll just smile. Means I won’t have to flip a coin.

            Currently, there’s plenty of legal ways to get virtually the same rights. Wills for inheritances, living wills and durable powers of attorney and durable powers of medical attorney for health matters, joint checking accounts for financial matters. But, of course, that means going to (shudder) lawyers. I can understand a desire to shortcut that.

            As I said – it doesn’t matter to me which way your plumbing points. It doesn’t affect me, unless you make a pass. (Just take a polite ‘Thanks for the offer, but no thanks.’ ‘k?)

            But really… abortion = gay rights? Come on now….

      • Commander_Chico

        Abortion was a way to mobilize the bases of both parties. Maybe the polling is showing it’s a drag on the GOP nowadays and this reaction to Akin is a sign of that.

        The truth is that the GOP does nothing to outlaw abortion once in office despite using it as an issue in every election.

        Personally, I agree with your views. The reality is there is no way to outlaw it – aside from the political difficulty of charging 18 year old girls and doctors, it would be difficult to find a jury to convict in most parts of the country.

        • The truth is that the DNC does nothing to maintain abortion once in office despite using it as an issue in every election.

          “They’re gonna force your little girls to have back alley abortions! With COATHANGERS! WTF? OMG!”


          Got a friend who seriously literally believes that – he’ll vote for Obama because of it.

          Raw, naked appeal to emotion. Really getting tired of it…

  • Hank_M

    Of course McCaskill wants Akin to stay in the race.
    After his moronic comment, she sees a path to victory.

    Krauthammer has it right, there’s way too much stupidity already in congress. Akins will only add to that. He has to go.

    • herddog505

      I agree. He claims he misspoke. What the hell was he even THINKING????

    • jim_m

      It’s telling that the only people that want Akin to remain in the race are McCaskill and Planned Parenthood. But the conservatives want him out now

      · Radio/TV Host Sean Hannity urged Akin yesterday to reconsider running and reminded him that “elections are bigger than one person”

      · Radio Host Mark Levin similarly urged Akin to step aside saying this race is far too important to risk losing to the Democrats.

      · National Review’s Jim Geraghty observes, Who Isn’t Calling for Akin’s Withdrawal? Claire McCaskill & Planned Parenthood.

      · Columnist/Radio Host Dennis Prager penned a column for calling on his fellow pro-life leaders to join him in disavowing Akin’s remarks.

      · Columnist Charles Krauthammer on Fox News last night called Akin “toxic” and said “he’s got to go”

      · Radio Host Hugh Hewitt tweeted – “If Akin drops out and GOP wins Senate, he has career. If he stays in and GOP doesn’t win Senate, infamy and injury to prolife cause”

      · Author Ann Coulter penned a column in Human Events calling on Akin to do the right thing and step aside for the good of the pro-life movement

      · National Review editorial board called on Akin to step aside, writing in part, “Akin is a stalwart conservative and an honorable man, we regret to say that he inspires no such confidence”

      · Wall Street Journal editorial board also called on Akin to step aside, writing in part, “Having uttered one of the more offensive and ill-informed comments in recent years, Mr. Akin could cost his party a seat it is favored to win this November and thus possible control of the Senate.”

      · The Tea Party Express called on Akin to step aside saying “It is critical that we defeat Senator Claire McCaskill in November, but it will be too difficult to achieve that with Todd Akin as the conservative alternative.”

      Funny how the right wants to get rid of idiotic politicians that are embarrassing to the nation. The left makes them VP.

      • Brucehenry

        Good for all those folks. Although many are not condemning his comments, just afraid his inconvenient candor may cost the Republicans a Senate seat that seemed within their grasp.

        But the question remains: should Akin REMAIN in the race, who will your average Tea Partier vote for? McCaskill? Nope.

        • jim_m

          My experience is that the typical response in more like that of Chris Christie:

          “It’s [an] absolutely asinine, ridiculous statement by the congressman,” Christie said. “He should be ashamed of himself to be talking about it in that way. It’s stunning to me that somebody who’s offering themselves for high office like that would have those kind of thoughts and use that kind of language.”

          It wasn’t candor, no one is agreeing with him. No one. Candor is when dems say that capitalism has never worked (despite the historical evidence to the contrary). They reveal their anti-capitalist ideals. Akin revealed that he is out of step with conservatives with his idiotic ideas.

          You say that the right is only complaining because he will lose? How about the left encouraging him to run for the same reason?

          The answer to your last question is that people will likely not vote.

          • Brucehenry

            That is your subjective opinion. It is MY subjective opinion that Tea Party supporters will be virtually the ONLY ones who vote for Akin if he remains in the race.

          • Jwb10001

            And if that happens then they are just as guilty of having a replusive attitude as he is, it couldn’t be anything else like getting rid of McCaskill? But hey never let it be said that you are guilty of playing the guilt by association game.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes, getting rid of McCaskill by electing a Neanderthal misogynist is ABSOLUTELY the right thing to do. That’s why you’re a Tea Party supporter, Jim — you see these moral choices so clearly!

          • jim_m

            I do see them clearly, but it was JWB that said it not me so don’t go accusing me of something I didn’t say.

          • Brucehenry

            Oops, sorry, Jim.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes, getting rid of McCaskill by electing a Neanderthal misogynist is ABSOLUTELY the right thing to do. That’s why you’re a Tea Party supporter, Jim — you see these moral choices so clearly!

  • Well, regardless, even after the comment, Akins still leads in the race.

    • jim_m

      McCaskill is hard to lose to because she is a crappy Senator, but Akins is trying his best. I don’t generally put too much stock in PPP polls but they have the two within the margin of error and Akins favorability is 24 for and 58% against. I’d say that it is only a matter of time before he falls way behind.

  • Brucehenry

    What is this “comment hidden due to abuse reports” nonsense?

    Neither Otto, nor Lawson, nor Jim said anything abusive. All the hidden comments are replies to me, and I didn’t say anything abusive, so what’s up with that?

    • jim_m

      I might argue that some of your responses are an abuse of good sense, but that is not what the button is for. 😉

      • It’s fixed now.

        • jim_m

          Thanks again Kevin.

          Do we know what happened?

          • I have a strong suspicion, but I’d prefer not to elaborate. Probably doesn’t involve anyone who comments or writes here.

    • jim_m

      Now all my comments are being held for moderation? Seriously folks.

  • Pingback: Here’s The Latest Paul Ryan “Scandal” You’re Supposed To Care About | Wizbang()