GOP Senate candidate says most rapes aren't; women can mentally abort

Well I guess we could try this route...


Yeah thread title hype is messed-up!

garamet, he did make an idiotic statement.

The statement is undeniably idiotic. The question is whether or not he believes "If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."

His follow up statement is full of touchy-feelie buzzwords that do nothing to retract that.

I'm going to go with "He's a politician and therefore is probably lying about talking to a doctor." That's more in line with Occam's Razor.

Well it's kinda like looking at the two statements and deciding one sincere and the other is not.

I'll be honest, I don't know what motivated this politician to say something so stupid.

What is there to retract? He apparently seems to think that a female who has undergone a tramatic rape, not an imagined one, can magically abort or fail to concieve.

Hence, idiot.

Akin is an idiot. Biden is also an idiot. In fact, most politicians are idiots. I heap my scorn upon them all.

^This.

Have none of you been there? You might as well start addressing Akin as "The Honorable Senator from Missery"

Not quite. They honestly believe Jesus is there to catch the fetus.

That's why I keep a pogo stick next to my bed.
BTW if women can magically abort, I can magically impregnate. Just giving a "heads up" fair warning to:

Scarlett Johansson
Penelope Cruz
Jamie Lynn Sigler
Natalie Portman
Michelle Tractenberg
Kari Bryron
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.

The one about self-abortion, or the one about "legitimate rape?" Because my issue is more with the latter than it is with the former. The idea of self-abortion is simply an example of ignorance. But the concept of "legitimate rape" implies that there is also illegitimate rape. Where does he draw the line? Does he consider date rape legitimate? That's the thing he needs to spell out.

Regarding your other point, that I've somehow claimed a clairvoyant ability regarding the attitudes of the electorate, that's not what I'm claiming, but perhaps I confused you with the way I stated things. I'm concerned that a large number of voters might see things in the same way as Rep. Akins. Perhaps he believes they do, and was therefore motivated to make the statement. Hopefully I will be proven wrong by results in November.

Wrong!!

And on CNN, no less!

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/08/20/second-cnn-contributor-scrambles-to-deflect-cri/189441

And, what do you know: "Physicians for Life" is a misogynistic bunch of liars who trade on their status as doctors to promote the lie that Akin merely retold.

Woman hating anti-abortion types are, in fact, woman hating.

To be fair, I'm not psychic.




Seriously though, the title of your linked article is "Second CNN Contributor Scrambles To Deflect Criticism From GOP Rep. Akin's "Legitimate Rape" Remarks" and that's just what Erick Erickson did. He deflected criticism by claiming President Obama supports infanticide. Dumb to be sure but not much in the way defending what he himself called "Todd Akin's inarticulate remarks."

Okay, does that somehow make Akin's statement any less idiotic?

No, it means Todd Akin is an idiot. Big difference.

No you were pretty clear -

Or are you saying you misspoke too?

Clyde, why are you going so out of your way to defend this guy?

Hey, I can only vouch for the idiocy of the statement, but who knows, he may well be an idiot.

That's just it, I'm not. I've made that clear from the very beginning. He made a stupid statement and nobody (except CNN I suppose) is defending him.

If only someone in the studio was carrying a gun, this tragedy could have been averted.

Let's examine the facts:

1. He's a Republican.
2. He's a bible-thumper.

Check and check. Yup, he's a fucking idiot.

Not on the level that Akin did, not at all. I'm am legitimately afraid that a large portion of the electorate actually wants to hear this kind of thing. I believe that is in fact the case. I do not have special powers of observation not also available to you. Perhaps you disagree with my interpretation of the electorate. That's fine. But if you do, perhaps you are the one with a strange ability to read the thoughts of others?

You're rationalizing what he said and deflecting criticism of him onto others.

If that's not defending, I don't know what is.

Careful with championing death to idiots, glass houses and whatnot.

Are you implying that I'm an idiot? This means rep war!

Oh, wait....

Disagree with me and get a pos-rep from Ancalagon!

That tree-hugging left-coast hippie doesn't like me.