Just a question first. Is the misspelling of romney’s name in the headline deliberate?

No. I just flip-flopped a couple of letters. It could happen to anyone.

Thanks for pointing it out, and thanks to the editor for making the correction!

Talent, a key security affairs advisory to Romney, is apparently not worried that backing Akin will jeopardize his chances for being a member of Romney’s potential cabinet

Of course not. Romney is going to lose, Akin might still win.

send Michelle Obama

Certainly the party needs to support the lackluster McCaskill, Michelle might or might not be the best way to do that. Michelle absolutely needs to make one or even two visits to MA to support Warren. I’m not sure she would be a net benefit in MO.

I’m not saying Michelle would be a net help to McCaskill, either.

But Michelle giving Akin a First Lady-like smackdown is something I’d personally really like to see.

At the other end of the state, Shark-Fu weighs in on Akin’s misogynistic code language:

Translation…

Men who “come out swinging” display strength and conviction.

Women who do the same are aggressive, defensive, and . . . wait for it . . . unladylike.

[snip]

I’m betting that Senator McCaskill is operating on the political reality that well-behaved women rarely make history.

And odds are that’s why Akin is so distressed.

When it comes to translating code language, Shark-Fu is a master.

I don’t think Michelle is going to go to help anyone campaign but o. It seems that as far as they are concerned there is only one campaign and that is o’s. I think that o would be perfectly happy if the repugs won both houses of congress; it would give him a perfect cover for letting the repugs pass all the laws that they want. “My hands were tied, they were all against me.”

Ooh! Perfect, indeed! Hmm. I guess it’s time to break out the old, packed away, well–worn “well-behaved women..etc.” t-shirt. Who knew we were going to have re=fight these battles in 2012?

(well, having read history, I’ve known for awhile that every period where women had more rights and influence and even public roles has been followed by a period where all were rolled back, so I’ve half-expected it, just didn’t think it would be in my lifetime.)

McCaskill’s biggest problem is that she is a Corporate Democrat, IOW a traditional Republican, and you remember what Truman said, “Given the choice between voting for a fake Republican or a real one, most people will vote for the real one”. Akin is obviously a knuckle dragging troglodyte, but keep in mind RonE Raygunz adversarial relationship with facts, instead of being a non-starter his base loved him sticking by his beliefs in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary

All kinds of cycles are happening faster and faster. I suspect that most of the men elected to office would like to say things as akin has said, but feel that they can’t. I must say that I think that akin said a stupid thing, but I don’t think that he meant “legitimate” in the sense of legal, but in the sense of real. Of course, YMMV. I’m certainly not going to give it a second thought if you disagree, because it was stupid however one looks at it.

“This is somebody who kind of makes Michele Bachmann look like a hippie.”

LOL. Funny but a true insult to hippies everywhere.

We’re not re-fighting that battle in Missouri in 2012; we’ve never stopped fighting it.

After all, Missouri is the home of that sage Akin adviser Phyllis Schlafly, who is quite unladylike in her own 18th century way.

The Democrats spent a lot of money during the MO Republican primary to encourage conservative voters to choose Akin. So McCaskill would have someone to be a lesser evil than. They helped give this guy a national platform for his bigotry.

Apparently that’s their idea of smart politics, or at least easier than having a platform, policies, candidates, and a record that resonate with the people of this country and make them actually want to vote for you.

Oh, no, you’re right, he meant in the sense of “real.” That’s much, much worse. What also chaps my butt on this whole Akin thing is that most of the references to it since it happened only mention the “legitimate rape” part of what he said.

He made two ridiculously horrible and stupid (in the sense of willfully ignorant) statement, and although I vacillate, the second part, expressing a belief that women’s bodies can voluntarily (or even involuntarily) “shut down” conception in case of rape was bigger. Perhaps it was just more amazing, since I sorta thought everybody had some basic education on the physiology of both sexes these days.

Just in passing, if a guy is one of those who make faces, back up and hold up their hands in a “stop!” gesture, saying “eeewww” whenever the subject of menstruation comes up, however peripherally…he’s on the spectrum with Todd akin of hositlity to women. It’s always infuriated me to listen to the implication that what’s ordinary and everyday familiar to women is utterly “other” AND disgusting to men.
There, I’ll stop.

st. ronnie’s base felt as he did, that “facts are stupid things.”

Huh. No kidding. Can’t believe she’s still around.
I thought maybe her influence would diminish when reports surfaced of other mothers having to pick up her kids from school or activities because oh-so=traditional-woman/mother Schlafly would flat out forget they were expecting her to get them.
But no; just another example of hypocrisy of the proponent not mattering to the “truth” of the principle.

Note, please, that John Boehner put Todd Akin on the House Committee on *Science*, Space, and Technology.

Clearly Todd Akin is not the only person in DC unclear on what science is.

All that you said is true. Just an aside, but another way many men try to put down women is to attack their physical appearance instead of paying attention to their statements.

I recall your earlier post about Akin’s choices, and at that time, I said that Akin should stick to his “guns” (if you will) and not back down. I wanted Akin to stand his ground so everyone could see exactly who he is and what he stands for.

As you indicate, MO is home to that dreadful Phyllis Schlafly, who is still a “darling” amongst far too many conservative women. Schlafly’s hypocrisy knows no bounds, but like Sarah Palin, some conservative women appear to love to lap that up and find it satisfying. I’ve never been able to relate to that. Others, though, have pointed out the ongoing disconnect with conservatives and facts, so…

Thanks for the update. I figured that the State & Fed Republicans would eventually flip flop and sally forth to provide financial and other support to Akin because… they are also major hypocrits.

I have to give Akin this: as loathsome and despicable as he is, he stood his ground and didn’t give in. Somehow I cannot call him a hypocrit, but he is surely divorced from factual reality. And clearly wishes only to suppress and oppress at least 51% of the population.

McCaskill is pretty worthless. I wouldn’t be surprised if Akin wins, sad to say. That’s the way things are, and I think the 1% loves to have the Akins of the world around. Akin is one of their pit bulls, ever ready to oppress, suppress, dominate, control & dictate to the 99%… all based on his self-righteous, allegedly “pious faith.”

Bah humbug!

True, but women do that to women as well. Cannot tell you how many usually conservative women (sadly sometimes liberals, as well) will cast aspersions on someone based on their looks. I’ll never forget when Ruth Bader Ginsberg was appointed to the SCOTUS. Oy vey! Some conservative women’s comments were appalling & scathingly nasty but ONLY based on her looks. ICK.

On Edit: and of course, there’s the diatribes about Hilary (I’m not a fan of the Clintons, but really? you’re busting Hils on her looks???) and Janet Reno, to name a few others.

Yeah. (face palm.) I’ve wondered if he was being ironic? ‘Cause I don’t think Boehner is as stupid as he pretends to be. He’s a pure cynic,interested primarily in power.
Akin, I suspect, although he may be interested in power, too…who would run for Congress who wasn’t?…is mainly ignorant/stupid.

Bear Country…not to sound too snarky, y’know i love ya man, but …you didn’t think I hadn’t noticed that, in 30 years around courtrooms and law offices?

OT…but it falls in the category of either ignorant or stupid:

my landlord’s lawn crew is here, while it is raining and has been all night! Kid with a leaf blower trying to suck up the wet leaves in the backyard right now; rest of crew unloading weedwhackers etc. from van in front…
Won’t they get electrocuted using a corded weedwhacker/edger in the rain? Should I go out and stop them? Otherwise, I suppose it’s no skin off my nose if they want to work in the rain, other than the LOUD noise…. (and frightening my cats, who are now running for under-the-bed)

I basically believe Akin when he said he misspoke when he used the term ‘legitimate rape.’ He probably meant something like, ‘If it was, in fact, rape.’ Since people do sometimes lie about having been raped, it isn’t exactly outlandish to acknowledge the fact. I’m not sure what he’s said about the rest of his comments, but I think everyone’s acknowledged that they were ignorant, haven’t they? I think he apologized for it. Why can’t Missourians simply take his comments under consideration when they decide whom to vote for?

As far as his beliefs about the minimum wage, they are no different than Alan Greenspan’s, who has said he doesn’t believe in it.

Akin knew exactly what he was saying, which goes something like this:

If a woman is legitimately raped — if she is violently taken against her will — then her body has magic powers to make sure that pregnancy does not result. If she gets pregnant, well, that’s just proof that she was asking for it and subconsciously enjoyed it.

He was asked about abortion in the case of rape, and said that if you are legitimately raped, you don’t get pregnant, so there’s no need for a rape exception in abortion laws.

Sorry, but that’s not mis-speaking. That’s mis-thinking.

And yes, Missourians will take his comments under consideration.

Is that a direct quote, or is that your gloss on what he said?

Are you serious? In case you are here’s the exact quote (no he didn’t use the word magic but that’s what he described):

“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

Maybe the magic didn’t work “or something?” He later explained which doctor (not doctors) he got that from…a complete wacko quack.
The man believed that rape didn’t cause pregnancy.
Are you trying to tell me, that as a woman, I shouldn’t be furious that such an ignorant fool has legislative power over my body?

“shut that whole thing down”, that is, prevent conception. riiiiight.

That’s a magic process the man is describing. So,yeah, Peterr was glossing what Akin said, but he glossed it pretty well.

Oh, and I don’t give a rat’s ass about his apology. He apologized to try soothe the outrage and astonishment. It doesn’t change his profound ignorance and deep-seated hostility to women. Men who are that ignorant about women’s physiology are so because they don’t want to know. They don’t want to know because women are foreign, not quite-as-human-as-men critters and it’s just too disgusting to find out. A conclusion drawn from experience, believe me.

If that’s a direct quote, then it sounds like what he meant was ‘legitimate rape’, a synonymn for forcible rape, as opposed to statutory rape.

But this latest display of reactionary thinking by Akin will not stop the flops from flipping. The more Romney’s fortunes founder, the more the GOP needs to pull out all the stops to win the Senate, and if principles like “women are human beings, too” need to be sacrificed to the cause, so be it.

These are the Rebecca Solnit’s of the GOP. If Romney continues to abstain from supporting Akin, I wonder whether that makes him part of the rancid sector of far right?

It’s my interpretation of the video interview he gave to KTVI television.

Full video here.

Akin’s apology did not address the whole “you can’t get pregnant from rape” nonsense that he was spewing. As tejanarusa said @13, it’s this second part of his comment that explains just how stupid and misinformed the first part is. Here’s how he opened that apology (from the same link above):

As a member of Congress, I believe that working to protect the most vulnerable in our society is one of my most important responsibilities, and that includes protecting both the unborn and victims of sexual assault. In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it’s clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year.

And the way Akin shows his empathy for those who have been sexually violated against their will is to take away their own personal agency and decisionmaking abilities in how they will deal with being pregnant as a result of that rape. Being rendered powerless to withstand the rapist is met with more being rendered powerless. Lovely.

The key to understanding Akin’s remark is that it came in response to a question about an exception for rape in abortion laws. Akin doesn’t believe there should be any exceptions, and this is how he justifies not having one for rape. His only apology is that he didn’t frame that argument well.

He’s saying that if a woman ends up pregnant, she could not have been raped, because the female body prevents pregnancies after rape.

He wasn’t making distinctions about statutory rape, or spousal rape, or other distinctions made in law. He was talking about whether the woman is a slut or a victim.

Chihuahua! Hasn’t that been established already? I mean just in this thread? Are you reading all the comments? Of course that’s what he meant, as well as “fake rape” in the sense of women falsely claiming to be raped. I have no doubt (also based on years of life and legal experience) that he is one of those men who really believe only a few “claimed” rapes are real, that false claims of rape are much higher than they really are.
And believing that “real rape” doesn’t result in pregnancy gives him a fig leaf for that nonsensical belief.

Trust me, the armies in Bosnia and Rwanda didn’t harbor any such fantasies. They raped women deliberately, in large numbers, and held them until miscarriage or abortion was impossible to be sure that large numbers of their own ethnic groups would be born, and to ensure the humiliation and rejection of the women who bore such children. It was a deliberate weapon of war.

“Are you trying to tell me, that as a woman, I shouldn’t be furious that such an ignorant fool has legislative power over my body?”

Why would I tell you that? If you live in Missouri, then vote against him. But I don’t see anything wrong with parsing out exactly what he said.

Thanks, Peterr. You did that more concisely and better than I. I’m afraid the rage that rises whenever I think about this idiot having any pubic office clouds my vision.

I see a lot wrong with (deliberately?) mis-parsing out what he said. It appears you hadn’t been paying attention, even to this thread.

And since he’s a member of Congress, let alone should he become a Senator, let alone be on the Science (!) Committee, he does have that power. And that is just infuriating. And frustrating, since I don’t live in Missouri.

tejana, I wasn’t thinking that you hadn’t noticed, I was simply bringing it up to remind people that it was something that happens with regularity.

I also think that you are correct that cal222 has not read the thread at all because all points that s/he raised have been asked and answered.

I hear you. And I’m a woman who does live in Missouri. Should Akin win, I might have to go back to referring to it as “Misery” instead.

You have my sympathy. And my hopes that you will be taking at least five like-minded friends to the voting booth with you, right? Right?

Sorry, I didn’t mean to offend you, BC. My hackles were raised, and I was firing off the comments.

I would lay money that cal222 is male. Despite the abundant evidence that many women are the enemies of other women.

I live in Mass and a couple of days ago got a call from Akin’s campaign. . . don’t know how I got on their list, I have never donated to a political campaign of any hue. Nor am I some closet Birch Society member.

I didn’t pick up the phone. It was just on my caller ID so I clicked it off. Mass would seem the unlikeliest place on earth for Akin to be fishing for donations.

Book Salon is up with Anat Shenker Osorio’s Don’t Buy It: The Trouble With Talking Nonsense About the Economy hosted by spocko

Well Peterr, I did check out the video you linked to, and it doesn’t discuss the rape remarks, though the text beneath it does. The text doesn’t really clear things up, though. I think Wikipedia has a good discussion of the whole thing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Akin_'legitimate_rape'_and_pregnancy_comment_controversy#cite_note-18

There is also a YouTube video posted on August 21 where Akin states, “Fact is, rape does lead to pregnancy.” Here’s the link to that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R57E3S8RO7A

Now, I would call that a recantation, not just an apology for having stated things poorly. A lot of times politicians say they “misspoke” as a euphemism. I think he makes it clear here that he thinks he got his facts wrong.

It’s the third video down, and it very clearly DOES talk about rape. The opening question from the reporter was “What about in the case of rape? Should it [abortion] be legal or not?”

And yes, I’ve seen that ad from Akin. He says “rape can lead to pregnancy,” not “does lead,” and it still fits with his original remarks where he said “that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape . . .”

Most telling, though, is the conclusion to the ad at your link, where he says “the mistake was in the words I said, not the heart I hold.” Akin’s heart is in the 18th century, where women need not trouble their pretty little heads about such weighty ethical matters like pregnancy and rape, and where women are ladylike when discussing important things with their betters.

Akin is a sexist conservative. Period. And he would agree with me in that conclusion, claiming that God wants men to be in charge of their wives and daughters, because that’s how God ordained it to be.

As a pastor, I’d disagree with his biblical interpretation skills — but that’s how he talks and how his mind works.