Peterr noted some of the developments in the Todd Akin story. The deadline for easily withdrawing from the Missouri Senate race has come and gone, and Akin remains “in it to win it,” defying even a call by the presumptive Vice-Presidential nominee (and a friend from the House Budget Committee, as well as a partner in anti-abortion politics), Paul Ryan. Akin attacked “party bosses” for trying to force him out of the race, overriding the will of Missouri Republicans. He did leave the door open a crack by saying that “I’m never going to say everything that can possibly happen — I don’t know the future,” but he was largely defiant today on Good Morning America.
But on his apology tour, Akin actually went further in his comments about abortion and rape, something that should not be overlooked. He actually dug a bigger hole.
On Dana Loesch’s radio show (and let’s just pause for a moment to marvel at the fact that Dana Loesch has a RADIO SHOW), Akin made this statement:
AKIN: You know, Dr. Willke has just released a statement and part of his letter, I think he just stated it very clearly. He said, of course Akin never used the word legitimate to refer to the rapist, but to false claims like those made in Roe v. Wade and I think that simplifies it….. There isn’t any legitimate rapist…. [I was] making the point that there were people who use false claims, like those that basically created Roe v. Wade.
The reference to Roe v. Wade concerns Norma McCorvey’s rape claim at the time of the Supreme Court ruling, allegedly to strengthen the case for abortion. But in the current context, Akin is basically intimating that women pretend to be raped so that they can receive an exception to the ban on federal funding for abortion, or an exception to getting an abortion in the event that Roe gets overturned.
This is the “in-person voter fraud” of the forced birth lobby. The actual claim being made here is that “legitimate rape” should be distinguished from false claims of rape that try to scam the federal government into paying for abortions. That’s essentially why there shouldn’t be an exception for rape, as there isn’t in the GOP platform.
This has gotten a little bit of coverage, but not nearly enough. In the midst of apologizing and calling rape “an evil act,” Akin called into question the veracity of rape claims, to make a point against allowing abortions.
This is fast becoming an enormous problem for the Republican Party, beyond the immediate issue of a Senate seat in Missouri, on the eve of their national convention (which Akin has been banned from, incidentally). They really don’t want to talk about abortion during a national election; they know their position is way outside the mainstream. All of a sudden, there’s an entryway to talk about the fact that there have been more anti-abortion bills in the House than jobs bills over the past two years, that the GOP platform bans all abortions, that there is this undercurrent of branding rape victims as liars and junk science behind the policy priorities.
Paul Ryan was asked on a local television interview today about the rape exception and he couldn’t bring himself to support it:
In the same KDKA interview, Ryan was asked if he thought abortions should be available to rape victims.
“Well, look, I’m proud of my pro-life record. And I stand by my pro-life record in Congress,” Ryan said. “It’s something I’m proud of. But Mitt Romney is the top of the ticket and Mitt Romney will be president and he will set the policy of the Romney administration.”
That’s a classic non-answer. The Vice Presidential nominee could not bring himself to say that a woman who has been made pregnant through rape should not be forced to carry the baby to term. This is far bigger now than Todd Akin.




60 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
He can’t. He would be excommunicated. He cares waaaaay more about getting his holy cracker every Sunday than he does about millions of women & children living in desperate poverty.
Another enlightened view of women from the right:
National Review: Women ‘evolved’ to prefer superior rich men like Romney
I know nobody here at the Lake likes her very much, but MoDo disposes of the GOP’s “medieval” anti-woman attitudes fairly well today.
Robin Marty nails it with regard to Ryan and abortion. This isn’t the first time he’s given a non-answer, while still giving winks and nudges and dogwhistles.
This was front-paged on Bloomberg as of 1:30 pm EDT (13:30 East coast time):
Ryan’s Record of Abortion Opposition Consistent With Akin’s
Key excerpt:
And, too close to home for me:
Question: Has anyone considered that these recent attacks against women in the political sphere perhaps be part of a much larger propagandistic scheme of creating an election year narrative where Obama wins/selected due to “overwhelming support by women”? Furthermore does this set up the system to make the next puppet ruler to be a Queen?
Twenty-five years ago, my state senator made the same argument against a rape exception from the abortion ban he proposed.
The new “nooz” about Akin’s pin-head dancing is old news. The fundie conservatives have been saying this about Roe v. Wade for quite some time now. Plus most fundies are against ANY abortions ever, no matter what. If it means the mother must die so that the foetus lives? That’s fine with them. Of course, once the baby is born, it’s on its own as far as the super religious are concerned. Gotta pull itself up by its bootstraps ‘n all.
Nothing Akin has said has been surprising, if one has any familiarity with this type of religious dogma/thinking/philosophy/belief.
I don’t think so. These attacks against women are very much from the gut. And, although the Democrats have their share of politicians with similar views, this is a real dividing line between the two national parties. On this one issue, there is no “lesser of two evils.”
Poodle Ryan is just a con-artist looking for a good grift.
Akin probably does have more principles and appears to willing to stand on his “beliefs,” no matter how wrong-headed they appear to be.
Who’s more honest? Akin or Poodle Ryan?
Frankly, I can see the appeal of Akin to certain constituents who are just as fed up as we are here at FDL with these lying scam-artists. Not that I agree one iota with Akin. Just saying…
“GOP platform bans all abortions, that there is this undercurrent of branding rape victims as liars and junk science behind the policy priorities.”
This is the same as the approach to climate scientists (liars, getting grants) , climate science (a hoax) , and any action to reduce carbon emissions. (banned)
Bart Stupak was a “Democrat.” There’s puh-lenty of “Democrats” who have the same misogynistic, sexist views as the so-called “Republicans” do.
Won’t take the Dems – ever moving rightward – to reach the same perspective as the GOP has, IMO. Not much difference from where I sit.
Yes, indeed. And what have the “Democrats” done about that?? How have the “Democrats” served the 99% better in these matters?
I don’t see how electing a woman president follows.
I am pro-choice, but.. unless there is something wrong with the fetus why would a woman who has been raped or had incestual sex wait for five months to seek an abortion?
The abortion issue is the primary reason why we must get more women elected to office – but not if they are blue dogs. McCaskill is a blue dog and follows Obama completely.
They can always be used for imperial war cannon fodder, or some saavy business man could always use the live bodies to fill private prisons- or for plantation industries- idle hands do the work of the devil, you know.
This platform, policy or belief; call it what you will, is the strangling hand around the throat of full equality for all in this country. As Margaret Mead pondered, ” what to do with the men ” I don’t think she thought they should all be politicians, lawyers, bankers and such. Cowboys, to Margaret methinks, would have been a far better profession for most of these vigilantes rather than overseers of the rights of all. Blacks, women, Native Americans and any sub-group that threatens the male’s role in this country has to be corralled and hobbled. The preferred method of choice for Conservatives, and some Dems, appears to be through controlling the sexual organs and their functions. On this point I’m sure Margaret would have concurred, ” but of course you dummies it makes perfect sense from a dicks point of view. “
That’s total bullshit.
According to Cosmo, women prefer men with a tight ass and a good sense of humor. If you’re short, fat and bald it doesn’t matter how rich you are.
Has it occurred to anyone else that some of these Republican tut-tuters are saying one thing to Atkin in public and another thing to Atkin in private? That they feel they have to put on a public show of disapproval but are privately telling him to hang in? McCaskill is in serious trouble and Atkin could still beat her.
I’m guessing that Brown wins in MA. (Tell me, again, why Warren jumped into a Senate race.) There isn’t much between the Republicans and the Democrats in the Senate, four more Dems than Repubs. Three wins could turn the Senate around. Two could tie, which given the Democrats’ perfidy, would be as good as a Republican majority. In terms of policy, the Republicans set the agenda now. I just don’t see Republicans seriously bulldozing Atkin to get out.
Google that question for far better replies than I can give you. I’m surprised you would need to ask.
Now back to real politics……I just love how both Romney and Ryan squirm to NOT answer questions. The republicans have been doing that for 20 years now and the people are getting way tired of that. It may likely be one of the major reasona only 27% of people surveyed admit to being republicans.
This has been one of the more interesting campaigns in recent memory and will likely to continue to be.
Marcy Kaptur is adamantly anti-abortion. And stem cell research. She supported Stupak-Pitts and voted for it. Yes, there are anti-abortion Democrats, some of whom are women.
I agree. The GOP is giving this issue lip service. They have to. Buy they are SURE they can spin this and save the day. Tha MA senate race? Could go either way IMO. I don’t see a major shift.
The big questions is will we have a reversal of 2010 in the house. I think that’s quite possible. Akin is not gonna drop out and they can’t make him.
That is a myth. Women are just as bad as men if they’ve been brainwashed into believing God has made men their superior and they need to submit.
The same argument was used as regards to war, but Madeline Albright, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Margaret Thatcher, Fran Townsend, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton prove there is little if any difference at all.
I’d rather have equality minded people of any sex or race.
Why can’t “liberals” just get off this “rape and incest” hoopla and just make hard-and-fast defense of a woman’s right for an abortion, PERIOD?? Once again, Dims try to gain a small tactical advantage at the cost of shifting the Overton Window rightward.
-stewartm
Idiots running both parties. That’s why we are in such a mess.
Because of the Catholic swing vote in Minn. Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri, ______ (insert state there ); that’s the simple answer. And the political calculation inherent in that equation. Now, say 3 Hail Marys and feel really badly about your Democratic vote.
I’ve had abortions and weighed these questions personally, although I did not have to struggle with the incest aspect of the question. I guess this comes down to when someone feels it’s no longer morally tenable to have one. If you’ve waited for 5 months but haven’t been locked in a basement nor chained to a bed- and there is nothing wrong with the fetus, it’s getting kind of late.
I’m surprised at your condescending non answer, but maybe that’s giving you too much credit.
This one is for you and a couple of people upthread:
The Democrats Problem with Abortion: What happened to the pro-choice movement anyway?
Just FYI his name is Akin, not Atkin.
Yes. At least, I think *some* of the GOP/Tea Partiers are doing just that. One “face” shown to the public, and the other “face” shown to Akins.
OTOH, I think RMoney & his poodle, Ryan, will flip-flop & say anything, if they think it’ll get them a vote or 2. I don’t think either of them has one principle to stand on. JMHO, of course.
Thanks for the link. Good article. Too bad most/all of the currently incombent “Democratic” pols won’t take a real stand on the right to an abortion. It’s been made radioactive by the corp-owned rightwing propoganda wurlitzer, and so-called “Democratic” pols will dance on the head of pin trying to avoid being pinned down on a clear stand in favor of a woman’s right to choose.
Quite frankly if we had an opposition party they’d oblige the GOP with a discussion on rape. It’s an under reported crime, not an over reported one. It’s bad enough as it is that when a woman goes to report it and tries to get justice she has everything from her manner of dress to her previous sexual partners analyzed. It isn’t any wonder it is under reported. The GOP wants to add another level of horror by FORCING a woman who was ALREADY FORCED to have sex to share her vital nutrients and risk her life to give birth. So much for small government.
http://www.labspaces.net/122242/Jailhouse_phone_calls_reveal_when_domestic_abusers_most_likely_to_attack
Scroll down to the paragraph starting “The key to understanding…” The whole article is interesting, but the role of religion and cultural inculcation is stark. I do think the Republicans are attuned to the sexual vibrations in these issues and they pound on that theme.
Don’t give me credit, just Google and find out.
Thanx. Altho I may continue to misspell just because.
Have you heard of Post traumatic Stress Disorder and do you know how it works? Many victims of trauma intentionally try to block out the trauma to attempt to deal with it. There brain partitions it off as a coping mechanism.
The principle of self-aggrandizement.
OT on Warren. Her decline in the polls is directly related to the very heavy advertising against her by the financial community, who fear her as a potential Presidential candidate in 2016. What this shows is the on-going relevance of television for political campaigns. I’m gobsmacked, since I never watch the damn stuff. But enough people do for heavy advertising to make a difference. I don’t think there is any solution to this short of people simply turning off the the thing.
I am deliberately dodging your reply @29 to other commenter(s), but I wanted to explain why I also consider this issue to be a real, active threat. I reside in the District of Columbia, where we don’t have any votes in Congress. The real, non-academic threat, directed exclusively at residents of my city, takes the form of H.R. 3803 which fell 67 votes short of actual passage in the House of Representatives only because they needed two-thirds under the suspended rules procedure they used. The super-long block quote below includes only a few of the key “findings” and only the essential crimes they wanted to add to the criminal code. I omitted the whole enforcement scheme; you can read the entire bill here.
Two hundred twenty members of the House (including 17 Dems) just voted for this piece of shit less than one month ago:
I wonder how much good it does for the media to go on and on about the crazy things that Akin, or King or West or any other nutty congress critter says. After all, they didn’t get into office by themselves–people voted them in. I think the media needs to start profiling the idiotic, ignorant public instead.
Which I have done completely. I have a big teak entertainment center with an old 32″ TV and a DVD/CD player and a stereo tuner and speakers, all behind solid doors. I think someone could break in and make off with the TV and it would be months before I noticed. Which I guess says something revealing about the frequency I dust in there…
I knew Marcy Kaptur has been an ugly problem for Dems, so I was surprised to see that she was not listed as a sponsorof that H.R. 3803 I just posted, and she did not vote on final passage of that piece of shit.
Maybe she had a scare in a primary. Dunno.
Charlie Pierce:
State of the Mass. Race: How Elizabeth Warren Can Win
I read all of Pierce’s posts because they’re insightful AND funny, but he also lives in Massachusetts.
Better keep that thing dusted or you might miss the Rapture. :)
It is kind of amazing how tv is such a great propoganda tool, isn’t it? Very effective with certain segments of our populace.
I do watch tv but sparingly, and most of what I watch is mostly free of political ads. The few ads that I do see have no impact on me bc I basically feel that they are all LIARS and charlatans, plus I don’t rely on ads to “learn” about candidates.
I apologize if Thomas won’t serve the bill text at any of the links I provided. Some of the “temp” links may expire after random time periods. The master index to the H.R. 3803 should persist at this permalink.
LOL. I’m an atheist so I will be Left Behind anyway.
Akin intimates indeed.
Why aren’t we hammering home the fact that Ryan and Akin put forth a bill together which would ban abortions? Why aren’t we linking their names constantly so people will understand how radical Ryan’s beliefs are and that Romney endorses them enough to make Ryan his VP candidate?
I worked, briefly, thank god, with a woman who told me “They couldn’t put that on TV if it weren’t true.” We were having a discussion about the Andersonville Trial drama and I had commented that the show portrayed Captain Henry Wirz as a deliberate purveyor of cruelty. In my reading, Wirz was incompetent for the command and far out of his depth. He didn’t want the post, it was forced on him. “They couldn’t put that on TV if it weren’t true.”
I don’t know how Kaptur thinks/feels about fetal pain. She may have reservations about the bill generally. It’s vicious.
They (GOP) are entirely vicious. But they are also bullies. They picked on a defenseless DC population with that crap bill. Why did they do that? Was it a stunt to force Dems to vote for “killing babies even though it hurts them”? If so, why pick on just DC?
You said, yourself, DC is defenseless.
Would it be too presumptuous to say that these creeps prefer unwanted pregnancies be resolved with the coathanger remedy?
I’m just trying to understand what strategic gains they made by whipping 220 members to vote for it, when it only covers DC. I can see why they pick a defenseless target, but why did they try to inflict that particularly cruel policy? What was their strategic purpose?
I know this is a disgusting topic, and I’m sorry to beat this horse, but I don’t think it’s a dead horse. If these assholes take the White House and keep the House, we cannot depend on the Senate to stave off this anti-choice insanity. Me and my neighbors will be the first victims.
It’s the Overton Window in practice. Take a policy that is extreme. Normalize it. Then attempt it on a National level. They want DC as their own little petri dish.
My response has steadily been: sexual sadism. They are fighting for dominance and unfettered access. Think about it: what more certainly demonstrates dominance than forced sex and forced pregnancy. I think most people don’t want to think about this perversion, too scary. But it’s coming to a legislature near you–if it isn’t there already. And, yes, women can harbor the same kinds of perversions, altho I think women are far more susceptible to men’s opinions of them than men are to women’s opinions of them. Women just seem more anxious to be found attractive and desirable and will adopt whatever elicits male approval. (I’m not getting into an argument about my thesis. I’ve been watching the game for 69 years and that’s what I see.)
Let’s call a pervert a pervert. If I pointed out someone who “wants to climb into every woman’s pants” what would you think? That’s who these people are. Let’s not go all civil discourse about this.
Given the company the Elect will be keeping, I think you’ll have the better of it.