I linked to it on the right and Tweeted it as well, but in case you missed it, this piece by George Neumayr is a must-read. A bit:
This culture of hectoring explains why Mitt Romney rushed to the cameras upon hearing Akin's remark to pronounce abortion in those cases "appropriate." In a rotten culture, proof of one's "civilized" bona fides comes from such shameless pandering.Emphasis above is mine. During the debates, Rick Santorum was asked about his no-exceptions position, too, and gave a vastly better explanation:
An authentically conservative party would find Romney's unprincipled position far more chilling than Akin's gaffe. If unborn children gain or lose their right to life depending upon the circumstances of their conception, then the party has already conceded that that right doesn't exist. Ronald Reagan understood the implications of that concession and never wavered in his defense of the right to life of all unborn children, not just some of them.
Instead of rejecting this media-determined culture of empty and opportunistic outrage, which rests on nothing more than poisonous Planned Parenthood-style propaganda, panicky GOP officials reinforced it this week by treating Akin as a monstrous leper. His stupid remark was thereby turned into a supposedly wicked one and treated as a great crisis for the party.
A party less cowed by political correctness and less in thrall to conventional wisdom wouldn't have cannibalized its own so quickly.
You know the Supreme Court of the United States in a recent case said that a man who committed rape could not be killed, could not be subject to the death penalty. Yet the child conceived as a result of that rape could be. That to me sounds like a country that doesn't have its morals correct. That child did nothing wrong. That child is an innocent victim. To be victimized twice would be a horrible thing. It is an innocent human life. It is genetically human from the moment of conception and is a human life and we in America should be big enough to try to surround ourselves and help women in those terrible situations who have been traumatized already. To put them through another trauma of an abortion, I think, is too much to ask. So I would absolutely stand and say that one violence is enough.And then I wrote:
The exception-for-rape-and-incest has never been a defensible stance. It's nice to hear someone articulate that. (Though whether giving birth or having the child suctioned-and-scraped away is more subjectively traumatic for the woman is beside the point if the child, objectively speaking, is a child, no?)I don't know Todd Akin from a hole in the ground. But, weird "legitimate rape" remark aside, his no-exceptions stand is perfectly sound. And relatively rare, which is a sad commentary on our culture and our politics.
Meanwhile, the Party of Abortion confirms the aptness of that title. I asked earlier whether they really wanted to make this election about abortion, especially given Obama's chilling, ghoulish history on the born-alive issue, which is receiving renewed publicity:
I still find his cold-bloodedness shocking in the extreme. His second child, born in 2001, was still a baby when he said those words -- "limp and dead," "temporarily alive" -- which left no doubt that what he was talking about was infanticide.
But to get back to the question, yes, it seems they do want to open this hideous can of worms. Paul Bedard reports on the DNC's plans to go full culture-of-death at their convention:
Democrats said that they will feature Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parent Action Fund, Nancy Keenan, president of the NARAL Pro-Choice America and Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown University student whose plea for federal birth control funding drew the ire--and a subsequent apology--from Rush Limbaugh.I think they're going to need to add a few more actresses if they expect anyone to watch their gruesome spectacle.
What's more, the Democrats are expanding their list of women ready to assail the GOP on women's issue, adding Maryland Sen. Barbara Mikulski and actress Eva Longoria to the list that already includes Sen. John Kerry and Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren.
Q: Can Sen. Mikulski and Miss Longoria exist at the same venue at the same time without canceling each other out, like matter and anti-matter? Stay tuned!
***
Many thanks to MichelleMalkin.com for the link.
***
Most recent posts here. Follow us on Twitter here. Amazon store here.


I am from Missouri, and I had never heard of Todd Akin either. I looked up his voting record, thought and it is not bad. It's exemplary, compared to McCaskill's. I am appalled at how politicians on both sides have jumped on the bandwagon in order to get votes, from idiotic women, apparently. If I were a Republican I would have stood by his pro-life principles and let the chips fall where they may. I guess I expect too much of politicians....
ReplyDeleteI hate to watch the Olympics. There is always that one little girl doing her routine on the mats; a routine she has certainly accomplished, flawlessly, a bazillion times. And then she slips, or falls, or lands poorly; once. I think of the YEARS she has prepped for this moment, and now she has failed. She is done, time to go home...empty handed. It's hard. But if they started giving out medals for 90% the value of those medals would drop to zero.
ReplyDeleteWith all due respect to our Olympic heroes, all of them, a Senate seat is more important.
Mr. Akin has undoubtedly worked hard to get to where he is. It's the final match for a Senate seat and he has landed poorly. He wants to stay in to prove he is no quitter but this is a team sport, politics and his unforced error threatens the whole team.
There are those that say we should stand by our wounded, like the Marines. But even the Marines wouldn't sacrifice a whole war for the sake of one wounded man.
"This is about abortion and he was inarticulating our core position" some say.
But this isn't just about abortion. It's about stupid. It's about the narrative of the nationwide campaign and staying on message. It's about winning the BIG battle, Obamacare.
If it had been Biden the MSM would all just laugh and let it go. But we can't pick our battlefield. We are where we are and complaining about the unfairness of it won't help. And anyway, do we want our very own Biden senator? "Don't worry, it's just Sen. Akin. He means well, and he's right, but he sometimes goes off the reservation, linguisticly."
I'm sorry Mr. Akin missed his moment. He's probably a very good man and now is the time for him to prove he is a great man because a lot of people will vote for "wrong" before they vote for "stupid." He can concede now or in November, but he will concede, and will that concession cost us the war?
Brad Ervin
I recognize the double standard, but the sad fact of the situation is that he came across as a boob on his own sans distortion. If you're running for Senate as a Republican, you must at least pass the boob test. Democrats (as in the case of McCaskill or Biden, etc) don't have to worry. Yes, the sentiment behind his statements is expemplary, but the science he relied on makes him look stupid. We can't afford to have pro-lifers branded as dumb. We can't, especially when there is sound science to help us (i.e. that a fetus feels pain). He needs to exit the race. We can win this seat.
ReplyDeleteThanks for a little more sanity on the Akin nonsense.
ReplyDeleteMomiss has got it right, looking up Akin's actual voting record rather than howling in horror at what others might say about his mouth-fumble.
Akin has a duty to Missourians: to run as the candidate they elected in the primary, not to cave in to outsiders like the ex-governor of Massachusetts and a rabble of self-anointed punditry. That is, unless the GOP is now ruled by the Fuhrerprinzip whereby Akin is obliged to obey his "betters" and to Heck with the people of Missouri who elected him.
This is why we need a conservative party rather than the scurvy thing Mr. Lincoln's party has become.
Walter B
The world is full of people that are right on the issues. We don't reach into this pool and select our candidates because they are right on the issues. Rather, we select our candidates because they can articulate and defend and advance our position on those issues. When a candidate proves he cannot articulate, defend, and advance those positions he ceases to be a factor for our good and becomes an unwitting tool of the opposition.
ReplyDeleteBrad Ervin
I'm from Missouri and I am sure Akin's comment was made to make the point that he supports legislation pending that will get rid of the loophole that allows for underage sex (statutory rape) to be used for free abortions. This man is no dummy, I can assure you.He may just be the most principled man in Congress and he deserves our support. Re is refusing to bow to the puppet masters in the GOP like Rove and the neo-con water carriers in the media like Hannity, Coulter and Rush. And let's show him we support his standing firm. He has voted the conservative position every time. He CAN defeat Obama sycophant McCaskill.Achin'for Akin
ReplyDelete