Does Akin have the right to say dumb shit? Sure. He might even be doing people a favor for letting them know now what an idiot he is. Whether Akin resigns or is voted out, I hope the masses don't have to suffer for his stupidity.
Brown is smart enough to know that someone from the inside needed to make a calm, but firm opposition. His stance is not just self-serving, it's about getting back some credibility to the Republicans in the upcoming elections. People already are making the connections between Akin and Romney. This could have a negative impact on the whole GOP party.
While it may be self-serving, it's still the right thing to do. I'd like to think that the overwhelming majority of either party is appalled by his comments. While Claire McCaskill's tweets about the whole thing are certainly justified, they are just as "self-serving" as Brown's position.
Unity horse -- down with Akin? <------ brain-hungry zombie headed to Akin's house
It's right but I like that he stuck up for his party. It's one thing for each person to say, "We don't agree." it's another to say, "We don't agree and don't even want you playing in our sandbox."
Zombies would be good, especially since his grasp of real science is so poor. I wonder what he would say about zombies.
Post by pedanticwench on Aug 20, 2012 13:40:57 GMT -5
I am SO FUCKING SICK of these stupid conservatives saying such FUCKING BULLSHIT but then hiding under the banner of "freedom of speech!"
You don't get to say something hateful, ignorant, and stupid and then hide behind the first amendment when people are upset or aghast or shocked at your statement.
Being called out for your stupid statements doesn't mean we're taking your rights away you dumb fucks.
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
I am SO FUCKING SICK of these stupid conservatives saying such FUCKING BULLSHIT but then hiding under the banner of "freedom of speech!"
You don't get to say something hateful, ignorant, and stupid and then hide behind the first amendment when people are upset or aghast or shocked at your statement.
Being called out for your stupid statements doesn't mean we're taking your rights away you dumb fucks.
Well, in all fairness, Akin didn't cry free speech. That was this stupid conservative right here. I love you too
Post by pedanticwench on Aug 20, 2012 13:48:04 GMT -5
No, but I don't doubt that would be his next line of thinking and will more than likely be his response in the near future, if not the response of his supporters.
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
"National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (R-Tex.) informed Rep. Todd Akin on Monday that the national GOP will not spend money to help elect him to the Senate after Akin’s controversial comments about “legitimate rape,” according to an NRSC aide."
I found this interesting. In the primary McCaskill ran an ad referring to Akin as a "true conservative" apparently hoping to motive the GOP true believers. Seems the runner up didn't have much of a public record so she figured it'd be easier to make her case against this neanderthal.
Here's hoping he sticks it out past tomorrow's deadline!
A GOP official told POLITICO that the National Republican Senatorial Committee will scrap $5 million in planned spending on the race if Akin refuses to drop out. NRSC officials want Akin to come to a decision on his own, “But if he stays in the race, the NRSC will be pulling out,” the official said.
“The committee has communicated to the congressman that we believe him staying in the race could put majority at risk,” the official added. “We will not be funding this race if he stays in.”
This makes sense. Why waste money on a race you will likely lose when you could pump it into another one? And this is also the response I can respect from the GOP - you did something stupid and you have the right to say or believe what you want, but remember there are consequences to your actions.
A GOP official told POLITICO that the National Republican Senatorial Committee will scrap $5 million in planned spending on the race if Akin refuses to drop out. NRSC officials want Akin to come to a decision on his own, “But if he stays in the race, the NRSC will be pulling out,” the official said.
“The committee has communicated to the congressman that we believe him staying in the race could put majority at risk,” the official added. “We will not be funding this race if he stays in.”
This makes sense. Why waste money on a race you will likely lose when you could pump it into another one? And this is also the response I can respect from the GOP - you did something stupid and you have the right to say or believe what you want, but remember there are consequences to your actions.
That's no different from what people have been saying since the beginning of this thread.
And the reason why we should allow this type of stuff into the public discourse is because there are people out there that agree with this guy and the only way to educate them is if we talk about this stuff. Ignoring it or just dismissing it as crazy doesn't open the door to educate anyone.
There is a time and a place for this type of education. It's called middle school and high school health class.
The fact that there are grown adults spewing these types of comments speaks not only to how far the extreme sides of our policitical pendulum now swing, but to the abject failure of our educational system.
I agree. I would also argue that giving credence to people who make absolutely moronic statements like this (clearly SOMEONE takes this guy seriously - he won the fucking GOP nomination for a senate seat) contributes to the downfall and idiocracy-izing of our country. Why SHOULD we accept that anyone has these views? Debating the validity of his view or his "right" to hold it puts it at the same level as a LEGITIMATE view on this issue, which it simply isn't.
This makes sense. Why waste money on a race you will likely lose when you could pump it into another one? And this is also the response I can respect from the GOP - you did something stupid and you have the right to say or believe what you want, but remember there are consequences to your actions.
That's no different from what people have been saying since the beginning of this thread.
Well, once again I don't think you're reading what I'm typing. I wasn't responding to what people were saying in this thread. I was responding to what Scott Brown said (which is very different from the statement from the GOP). Scott Brown said Akin should resign. The GOP is saying that Akin should decide what he wants to do based on his knowledge of the consequences. Also, Scott Brown said that there is no room in the public discourse for offensive remarks. I disagree for the reasons I mentioned in this thread.
This makes sense and I get why the Republicans wouldn't want him to represent the party, but I still disagree with Brown's statement - "There is no place in our public discourse for this type of offensive thinking." There should be room in our public discourse for all types of thinking, whether we think it's offensive and false or not.
But here's the thing to me - he didn't come out and state this as his opinion. He didn't say " I think this". He said doctors had TOLD him a woman's body could shut down rape.
That, to me, crosses the line out of opinion. That, to me, says he's presenting facts he's been told. And those facts are grossly inaccurate. And no. There should not be room in our political discourse for someone to come spew false fact/information.
If Akin pulls out, the next highest vote-getter in the primary was John Brunner, followed very closely by Sarah Steelman (who had Sarah Palin come out and campaign for her). Brunner is more business-focused with minimal political background. www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/16/john-brunner-missouri_n_1676955.html. Sarah Steelman is crazy in a Sarah Palin-minus-the-reality show kind of way. She was elected to the state senate when I worked there.
I've personally been involved in this process in MO, but on a much, much smaller level - an elected judicial position opened up, and then-Governor Carnahan asked the party to nominate someone. I held office in the county Democratic party, and we all voted together on who to nominate.
On the one hand, I want his party to push him out because I want the rest of the Republicans to get the message that this level of bat shit crazy is not acceptable. On the other hand, well, they voted for him, and I'd love to see him stuck on the ticket and harassed for this for months.
Post by basilosaurus on Aug 20, 2012 15:41:48 GMT -5
Apparently Steelman had Palin on her ads (H was in STL during the primary). So if Akin drops out, what are the chances that his replacement is equally BSC? I think it's high. This is MO, after all, the state that just passed a bill to allow students to opt out of any lesson if they claim it's against their religion. Apparently, biology (or set theory!) should be an optional assignment.
I disagree his opinion on this does not belong in the public discourse. The fact that elected Republican officials feel this way definitely belongs in the public discourse. I'd infinitely rather be discussing this using his actual words than what we all infer his thoughts are. I think it is terrific he wants to talk about this.
Apparently Steelman had Palin on her ads (H was in STL during the primary). So if Akin drops out, what are the chances that his replacement is equally BSC? I think it's high. This is MO, after all, the state that just passed a bill to allow students to opt out of any lesson if they claim it's against their religion. Apparently, biology (or set theory!) should be an optional assignment.
While I'd prefer Brunner over Steelman, I'm not aware of either having this kind of ignorance or indifference to rape victims. Let's not paint them all according to his horrid statement.