Image 01 Image 03

Akin confirms he’s staying in on The Dana Show, Huckabee

Akin confirms he’s staying in on The Dana Show, Huckabee

Republican nominee for U.S. Senate Todd Akin repeated on the Mike Huckabee radio show that he will stay in the race, saying “We are going to continue with this race for U.S. Senate,” which he then confirmed on Dana Loesch’s The Dana Show shortly after:

I don’t think this thing is lost by any means….I think we need to rush to the gunfire, I think we need to take this battle forward to defend America…I’m ready to continue this fight. I believe you’re going to see us, once again, standing in the U.S. Senate….let me make it clear on your program Dana, we are not getting out of this race. I’m in this race for the long haul, and we’re going to win it.

Earlier in the interview with Loesch, Akin spoke about party loyalty being short-lived:

There has been a big storm going on, really, and on the other hand I think there’s some very important principles that are at stake here…I ran for the senate, and the Republican party told me, when you win the primary, we will come to your aid….now what’s happened, the party embraced me, promised all kinds of millions of dollars and all kinds of. I misspoke one word in one sentence and overnight…they’ve asked me to step aside. The loyalty was short-lived.

And this:

We want to take our case to the people of Missouri….I feel like I’ve been hit by a 4 x 4 and I’m not likely to make that mistake again.

The majority of Loesch’s audience is from Missouri, and while many of her listeners expressed continued support for Akin, others called in saying they are scared about how Akin will survive without the financial support of the party.

If we step back from the Akin situation, regardless of whether he stays in–which it appears that he will–the GOP ought to take another look at themselves. Many Missourians who voted Akin in fear the Republican Establishment deciding their fate even more than the alternative. So much so that they’re reluctant to support booting someone with a liability like Akin, despite the controversy and fallout, because they are so wearied of the GOP.

If the GOP can’t count on the public’s trust in such a damaging situation as the Akin one, that is an even bigger problem as we head into the RNC convention and November.

Listen to audio of Akin’s interview on the Huckabee show here:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Hold the phone. Don’t go slamming the Republican Party, most especially those who rightly tossed Todd Akin under the bus.

This isn’t a loyalty test, it’s a race against evil in America. And Akin has decided to be evil’s hand maiden.

Maybe Akin is a witch.

Here is a perfect recipient of the last 45 seconds of the video from yesterday.

You can’t fix stupid.

I listened to the livestream of the interview. I hope I can get a transcript later. Akin claims he said “One wrong word” and that he really meant to say if it was an actual rape and not a false report.

Here’s what he originally said:

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down”

And now he says that the one wrong word was “legitimate” so if we strike that word:

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down”

Does that really make it all better?

    imfine in reply to myiq2xu. | August 21, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    I a not sure about the science of the deal, from what I have seen, there are conflicting studies that uphold which ever way you want to view it. All of that is largely irrelevant, if there is a law against abortion and all a woman has to do to get one is to say she was raped regardless of whether its credible, then there is no law against abortion as the loophole becomes the rule.

    If you interpret any other way, his works make no sense. If you changed the work legitimate to forced or credible, it makes more sense. But in no way shape or form should we be killing babies for the alleged sins of the father.

      Estragon in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 4:11 pm

      “Conflicting studies”? Well, link ’em. Something published, not the irrational musings of some idiot on the internet.

      There is ZERO evidence of rape having any effect on the ability or likelihood to conceive.

      It’s a belief of idiots.

        Quid Pro Quo. Show us the evidence of your statement that “There is ZERO evidence of rape having any effect on the ability or likelihood to conceive.”

        In all honestly, it is very likely we will never be able to our find out either way because we restrict our ability to question these things.

    It would probably make it slightly more understandable to the 15-second soundbite average voter as it conveys a clearer meaning and be easier to defend that few, but still some, women do claim rape after a consensual sexual encounter (for many varied reasons).

    Right now everybody is having to defend his use of the word “legitimate” and explain what that means. Basically it means that when you find out you’re six months pregnant and can’t get an abortion due to the “late term abortion” laws, you claim you were raped to get around the law. No evidence, no requirement for proof and no reporting requirement on the part of the abortion provider.

    For those who report the rape and are taken for forensic analysis by a SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner) the pregnancy rate is likely non-existant due to offering of Emergency Contraceptive chemicals which have a 90+% effectiveness rating on their own. Stack that on top of the (max) 5% chance of pregnancy, and you’ve reduced it to a 0.025% chance of rape pregnancy.

    Those who DON’T report leave an open question as to “was it Rape or was it a Consensual Encounter that they now regret.”

    Actually it makes it slightly better, but the damage is done. The science I have heard is one sexual intercourse encounter with a woman of child bearing years/fecundity has a 5% chance of pregnancy. The percentage of pregnancy in rape of woman of child bearing years is about 3%. Whether that is backed up by solid statistics and data I have not seen but I hardly find it shocking if claim is true. We know stress affects getting pregnant and rape is obviously very stressful.

    But this is no longer about the nuance of it. Akin may lose a senate seat and could impact other races (including Scott Brown). So I would have preferred he showed some character and bowed out for the larger goal and benefit of the country.

WHat a gross over reaction, in 2 weeks no one will remember. Seriousily republicans have to stop playing into dem’s hands. this is just crazy stupid.

    Pasturized in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 2:06 pm

    Yes, we will remember. And yes, some republicans need to stop playing into democrat hands by trying to defend the indefensible. Akin is just crazy stupid.

    Cowboy Curtis in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 2:10 pm

    Yes they will. The media will not let it die, Romney is going to get asked about it in every debate and interview he gives between now and election day, and he and Ryan, and pretty much every republican candidate in the country, is going to have to denounce him over, and over, and over. Even if it doesn’t hurt the party at large (big if), it guarantees Claire will have endless soundbites for commercials showing the man’s own party denouncing him.
    The situation is simply irretrievable.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    You may forget, since you have that luxury. But I will remember. You can count on that.

      OK, if abortion means that much to you, don’t vote for him. If you prefer higher taxes, universal healthcare destroying your medical care. Being perpetually unemployed, Rapists being let out of prisons so they can vote democratic, illegals, and drug runners having their way with the country, then again, vote for Claire. Vote for Obama, and see the real unemployment rate jump from 20 to 30%. But you’ll have abortion. Your children be starving and suffering from crappy socialized medicine, but any time you need it, you’ll be able to go abort that baby. So there, go ahead, remember all you want, and vote the way you want.

        Pasturized in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 2:28 pm

        Don’t be absurd.

        theduchessofkitty in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 2:31 pm

        This is not about abortion for me. This is about totally exposed stupidity, especially in matters of biological science.

        Akin displayed his total ignorance in one simple sentence. I don’t want stupidity from leaders. I want them to have the facts, straight up, without a doubt.

        A woman’s body “shutting down” during or because of a rape is one of the stupidest statements or arguments I’ve ever heard coming from somebody who’s apparently educated enough to know better.

        Basic biology doesn’t stop for trauma. People still breathe. Blood still flows in the veins. Hearts still beat. And women still ovulate: they don’t call it the “woman’s cycle” for nothing. The ghost of every raped woman, including those during wars, should tell anyone otherwise.

        That idiot just gave the perfect ammunition to Democrats. He does not acknowledge that he has been used. He does not understand that he has done damage beyond anything he can possibly fix. He doesn’t care. All he wants is to be Senator – the country be damned.

        And then they call Republicans, Conservatives and Christians “anti-science.” Go figure that out.

          All we need now is for a GOP’er to come out and say “You know, women wouldn’t have to worry about getting raped if they just stayed home”.

          9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to theduchessofkitty. | August 21, 2012 at 2:40 pm

          Bravo, Duchess. Excellently said.

          Alright so you object to Akin’s to what you believe is Akins misunderstanding of biology. Not that he approved of rape, nor did he say a woman could not become pregnant from rape, just less likely. Okay I get that. do you have a problem with Claire voting for Obamacare? Do you have a problem, with having your health care being made for the worse, that you are far more likely to be adversely affected by Obamacare than a rapist? You don’t have a problem with Democrats rejecting the science of economics in its entirety because you object to what you feel is misunderstanding of female biology during a traumatic crime? BTW I am sure you currently are a Dr, with a practice in gynecology?

          Ever thinks stupid things, sometimes they blurt it out, but I am not going to go with someone who is actually working to harm my family over something so stupid.

          theduchessofkitty in reply to theduchessofkitty. | August 21, 2012 at 3:10 pm


          I’m a woman. I know my body. It doesn’t take a specialty in OB/GYN to learn and understand a woman’s body or health issues. Any woman who takes the time to read books on human biology and reproduction can understand what’s going on inside her body. No MD required.

          I have learned over the years not to like stupidity in people.

          I don’t like stupidity in leaders.

          The fact of the matter is that the fix was in when Akin got 36 percent of the primary vote – which means about 2/3rds of the MO GOP didn’t want him to begin with. And all with the unknowing help of the Evangelical community (which I know quite well, since I’m a Baptist) who probably had no idea they ARE being used by the Democrats as well.

          McCaskill is one vile human being. The fact that she was quite willing to let the Democrats in her state fix this GOP primary in her favor speaks plenty of her evil. Everyone wants her out – but now that state has no other choice but to have her for a long time. This is a disgraceful loss, which risks everything the GOP and the Tea Party have been trying to build since 2009.

          This also speaks of the total ignorance of the Evangelical community to the tricks and maneuvers being played on them. Jesus Himself told them to be smart in those matters, because the “children of this generation are in a way smarter than the children of light.” But they still choose to ignore the reality right before their very eyes. Not good. Not good at all.

          Alright so you have no expertise or training, but you “know your body” because you a “woman”, and you gained that knowledge from being a “woman”, and not a man? Then you call him stupid because he does not know what you innately know because he is a man and not a woman? Hardly sounds like a fair standard your holding him to. Didn’t Jesus say something about judging people by a yardstick they would not judge themselves with? What do you think Jesus would say on the race between the 2? Who do you think Jesus would pull the lever for?

          I know Obamacare sounds like a minor issue.since I have been talking bout it as a counter to what you are saying, but I bet you have never been screwed over by a doctor. I mean really screwed, like mutilated or nearly killed by s doctor. I know the only reason why I am here today is that my private family doctor who is not a government employee saved me from the terrible medicine I received at the hands of a public hospital whom simply couldn’t be bothered to follow the simple procedures because they wanted to go home at the end of their shift. Liberals can’t wait until every doctor is a government employee, but they have no idea what they are asking for. but you would shot at this guy who will vote for you in every substantive way that counts.

          “This also speaks of the total ignorance of the Evangelical community to the tricks and maneuvers being played on them.”

          Did you really mean to go there? That is a little over the top to now state the Evangelical community as totally ignorant.

          theduchessofkitty in reply to theduchessofkitty. | August 21, 2012 at 3:37 pm

          Not all Evangelicals are being played. But a lot of them are. It happens more often than you think.

          theduchessofkitty in reply to theduchessofkitty. | August 21, 2012 at 3:45 pm

          “What do you think Jesus would say on the race between the 2? Who do you think Jesus would pull the lever for? ”

          Neither. His Kingdom is not of this world.

          Don’t excuse Akin’s ignorance on these matters. He’s educated enough to know better. And he stepped in it. Big time. No amount of excuses or “yardstick” judgements will take away the fact that he is the “wacky little congressman” that GOP consultant warned about to the people at NRO’s The Corner yesterday. The GOP and the Tea Party knew he was “wacky”, and that’s why two other candidates were running. Even Sarah Palin, an Assemblies of God by original affiliation, saw it clearly and went for Steelman. And I do trust Sarah’s judgement in these matters.

          The Democrats knew it, too – and THEY USED IT TO THEIR ADVANTAGE. Don’t forget that.

          “Neither. His Kingdom is not of this world.” Jesus’s kingdom may have been in Heaven, but there were 2 exceptions to this rule. I am sure you know the first quite well, when he pulled out a whip to drive out the money lenders at the table, but there was one other time Jesus did not approve of worldly conduct, those that harm their children. Ohh yeah, Jesus hated those people like no others, and wanted them to tie rocks around their throats to be “tossed into the river”. He disapproved of adultery, but he stood in front of those wishing to throw rocks at one. He healed and forgave soldiers injured in the course of trying of his murder. but those 2 points, he hated those people. He would probably make an exception to protect the children and vote for akin.

          DO you realize that you are making a scientific judgement from a completely subjective viewpoint? I too am female and I too know how devestating is rape however I also know I must not make scientifc claims based upon my own subjective emotions.

          In a pluralistic society seeking truth is how-so eloquently stated by Jeff Goldstein- we should have responded:

          “if Akin’s wrong, we say why we disagree with him and point him to different facts in an effort to perhaps change his view, or at least force him to find better facts. Shows how we are nuanced and open to intellectual discussion. Also could have shown how even EXTREMISTS are open to reasoning. Had a chance to demolish every caricature and cartoon.”

          Instead, we reacted by:

          “Namely, that we can be just as OUTRAGED as the left, preemptively so, too, if it’s one of ours. So see? It’s okay to vote for us because we, too, will enforce political correctness and anti-intellectualism disguised by a progressive-driven cultural consensus! Hell, we’ll force any candidate out who deviates!”

          That said; if you wish to lecture about ‘anti-science’ it is best to make your argument with reason rather than emotions.

      Well, duchess, since you don’t live in Missouri, it really isn’t up to you, is it?

      What I find disgusting is how the establishment GOP jumped on this like a june bug in fear that the Democrats would point the finger at them. Nevermind that Biden is a walking gaff machine, or the John Conyers said “Read the bill? Why should I read the bill?” or that Obama thinks there are 57 states, and we taxpayers only have highways to drive on or teachers in our classrooms by the grace and kindness of the federal government.

      We eat our own. But then, Missouri (which I was raised in) will have a choice, won’t it? Between Akin, who will be a solid conservative vote, or Criminal Clair, who will continue to support the Democrat’s socialist goals.

      Why is it that one idiotic statement can ruin an Republican’s career and reputation, but the Democrats can continue with their ways, and we are willing to accept the double standard pushed mainly by the lamestream media? Why do we continue to just roll over like trained dogs whenever we think the Democrats are going to use something against us? I can tell you; establishment GOPers have no cajones.

      And anyone want to guess who drove this scandal? Yep, the lamestream media who made it into a big deal while they continually ignore the gaffs of Obama himself. And how lovely, all the typical conservatives are just falling all over themselves to make sure that no Dem speaks ill of them.

      You may want to let the Dems write the rules, but not me.

    HarrietHT in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 3:44 pm

    If abortion is wrong because the life being taken is a human child, growing in the womb, then abortion is wrong in each and every pregnancy, even when conceived by forcible rape. A mitigating circumstance, such as an ectopic pregnancy in which the mother’s life is at risk, and the baby’s ultimately too, should be held as a medical decision. Obviously, when two lives are at risk, you save the most viable, in this case the mother’s.

    The problem with this entire firestorm is that the left and independents and establishment Republicans all have their own reasons for capitalizing on the furor, which they helped create, over Akin’s comments. And conservatives, sad to say, are afraid to hold their ground. It’s a pathetic spectacle, and a depressing commentary on America’s moral bankruptcy.

    Americans just don’t seem ready to take a stand for life.

    I agree Republicans should stop having press conferences falling over themselves in denouncing Akin. But Akin caused significant damage.

    syn in reply to imfine. | August 21, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    Yes Imfine, I would suggest that too many Republicans still do not understand that they willfully play right into Dem hands-they’ve worn the politically-correct stone around their necks for so long they’re petrified of saying one wrong word.

    They still play the political game by the Democrats rules, forever going in circles.

    if Akin’s wrong, we say why we disagree with him and point him to different facts in an effort to perhaps change his view, or at least force him to find better facts. Shows how we are nuanced and open to intellectual discussion. Also could have shown how even EXTREMISTS are open to reasoning. Had a chance to demolish every caricature and cartoon.

    I am a long time reader of Jeff @Protein Wisdom, for the last 11 years he has persistently written on this subject, ie the state of our society losing the ability to conduct a pluralistic conversation on difficult subjects.In this case abortion. (Freedom of speech-free exchange of ideas- is so depleted that we cannot even discuss the all important subject of abortion without the politically-correct MOB cutting out our tongues!) As he so eloquently notes with this comment in his post regarding this current fiasco:

    “if Akin’s wrong, we say why we disagree with him and point him to different facts in an effort to perhaps change his view, or at least force him to find better facts. Shows how we are nuanced and open to intellectual discussion. Also could have shown how even EXTREMISTS are open to reasoning. Had a chance to demolish every caricature and cartoon.

    The precise opposite of what we showed. Namely, that we can be just as OUTRAGED as the left, preemptively so, too, if it’s one of ours. So see? It’s okay to vote for us because we, too, will enforce political correctness and anti-intellectualism disguised by a progressive-driven cultural consensus! Hell, we’ll force any candidate out who deviates!

    US TOO!”

    “Replace “Limbaugh” with “Akin.”

    Most people continue to think politics is just about winning the next election and in every election are willing to concede to “political correctness and anti-intellectualism disguised by a progressive-driven cultural consensus” in order to win.

    We may well win the next election but we are losing America.

    And no amount of focusing on JOBS, JOBS, JOBS and what is in our wallets is going to rescue us.

Cowboy Curtis | August 21, 2012 at 2:05 pm

Four days ago I didn’t even know who this dude was, and in less than two days he’s managed to become the politician I despise most. Taking shots from the other team is bad enough, but at least they are on the other team. This guy is wrecking us from behind our own lines!

Listening to him with Dana, he unwittingly made the most compelling case for primary runoffs ever made.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | August 21, 2012 at 2:10 pm

    “Listening to him with Dana, he unwittingly made the most compelling case for primary runoffs ever made.”

    And for closed primaries as well.

      Establishment Republicans, and moderate Republicans, want open primaries because they fear the conservative candidates. Open primaries allow their open-minded liberal friends to help them pick Republican nominees. Conservatives need to gain control of their party by purging moderate, Establishment Republicans out.

        Cowboy Curtis in reply to Milwaukee. | August 21, 2012 at 9:24 pm

        As much as I agree with the necessity of closed primaries, and runoffs when nobody hits 50.1%, this isn’t a party establishment issue. This is a sticking your foot hip deep in your mouth issue. Dude needs to go.
        I’m no lover of the GOP establishment, nor its collection of campaign strategists. But that doesn’t mean they’re always wrong. This guy has made himself radioactive. Not out of principle, but out of sheer dumbassedness. There is a simple answer to the question he was asked- regardless of the horrible circumstances that might surround a child’s conception, it is a faultless human life, and it does not deserve to be destroyed for the sins of another- and somehow this guy managed to boot the ball, kick it across the infield, and toss it into the parking lot. He ain’t ready for the big leagues. Shit, he isn’t even ready for 5-A high school.

    stevewhitemd in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | August 21, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    Yep. He had plenty of covert cross-over help in the primary. Apparently Sen. McCaskill wanted him as her opponent, and she worked behind the scenes to get what she wanted.

    Akin is just foolish. What he said was foolish. His first attempted apology was foolish, and his second “I am not a witch” apology is even more foolish.

    You’d think that a six-term Congress-critter would know better, but there’s a reason why lots of them don’t go on to the Senate. He’s now demonstrating it.

    As plenty have said, he risks costing the Pubs the Senate and the ability to overturn ObamaCare. For that risk alone, he has to go. Ace of Spades makes the point: these guys are chess pieces. If you have to sacrifice one, that’s what you do.

    Time for Akin to go.

      Cowboy Curtis in reply to stevewhitemd. | August 21, 2012 at 3:48 pm

      Last night on Twitter, Ace pretty much laid down the law. Anyone who didn’t see it ought to look it up.
      The whole point of the exercise is to win. You know how many votes principled losers get to cast? Zero. They aren’t our friends, we owe them nothing. They are applying for a job, not us. As a candidate, they have one job, and that is to win, and to do so without crippling the rest of the team. If they can’t do that, well, then they are more than expendable.

    huskers-for-palin in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | August 21, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    Listening to him with Dana, he unwittingly made the most compelling case for primary runoffs ever made.

    Ding-Ding-Ding!!!! Post of the day!!! Perhaps someone in Missouri can start a ballot initiative to have primary run offs and/or closed primaries…..

theduchessofkitty | August 21, 2012 at 2:06 pm

I don’t live in MO (thankfully!), but if I did, I’d be hanging my head in shame.

These people have been USED. Their primary SABOTAGED by Democrats. And yet – still – don’t have a clue?!?!?!? I don’t like to cuss around, but… WTF?!?

This makes a good argument for the repeal of the 17th Amendment. If The People are too stupid and clueless to select their Senators, why should we trust them with it? At least their Legislatures are a direct representation and can make better sense, sometimes.

    9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to theduchessofkitty. | August 21, 2012 at 2:46 pm

    If the sundry state legislatures weren’t so messed up, they’d be on the 17th Amendment repeal bandwagon in a New York minute. Unfortunately as well, ignorance of the Constitution by voters means that any discussion of repeal would be demagogued by the left equally swiftly.

“If we step back from the Akin situation,…the GOP ought to take another look at themselves. Many Missourians who voted Akin in fear the Republican Establishment deciding their fate even more than the alternative. So much so that they’re reluctant to support booting someone with a liability like Akin, despite the controversy and fallout, because they are so wearied of the GOP.”

I’m trying…hard…to make any sense of that paragraph, Anne.

A little help, maybe…???

    Just to clarify, I believe 100% that Akin should resign. What we have here is the opportunity to ask, why is this even up for debate? He should go immediately. But some Missourians are unsure; if Akin resigns, a GOP committee will decide the nominee, and they are uncomfortable with handing over that power. How does that reflect on Missourians’ trust of the GOP? I think, poorly.

      Ragspierre in reply to Anne Sorock. | August 21, 2012 at 2:38 pm

      OK, that helps.

      But how much TEA Party influence is now exerted in the GOP Missouri infrastructure? It seems you assume not much, and I certainly don’t know.

      So, it seems you are imputing a lack of trust on your own speculation (which could be justified). This you may have based on the anecdotal evidence of hearing callers, which, again, could be valid or not.

      In any event, politics in America has earned the warm distrust and disgust of the voters. Which, of course, was the major motivator behind the TEA Parties. Still, there is an line between healthy skepticism and paralyzing paranoia.

      Anyhow, thanks for clarifying!

        Usually very little TEA Party influence has seeped into the “establishment GOP” party leadership of Missouri, cloakrooms or local committees. I would say that’s largely why they formed as separate groups in the first place.

        The individuals involved realized that it would take years (if ever) to get traction in the committees which make the “back-room” decisions, and figured it was easier to build a competing structure and take their petition to the voters directly by running primary candidates.

      Hello. It’s America, 2012. We all know neither of the parties are trustworthy. This should never come as a shock to any of us at this point.

      Tea Party over the Republican Party, any day.

Sandra Fluke is expecting.

Henry Hawkins | August 21, 2012 at 2:15 pm

Reposted from the Waiting thread where I p;osted it like two minutes ago, because that thread is killed by this thread:

Akin’s position – one he is clearly incapable of articulating – is that abortion ought not be permitted even in cases of rape, based on the idea that the unborn child ought not be punished for the crime of the rapist. (Bear in mind that some yahoo out in the NC sticks – me – just articulated in one sentence what Akin could not and still can’t).

How did Akin verbally support this? He said, in essence, that in cases of ‘legitimate’ rape the female physiology automatically shuts down the fertilization process, preventing pregnancy, therefore, in cases where women seek abortions after rape, the fact they are pregnant indicates their rape must have been less than ‘legitimate’. There is no other inference to draw from this.

Furthermore, he attributed his expertise on the inner workings of the female reproductive system to medical doctors by whom he was educated on the point. (And how do we react when global warmists abuse and misrepresent science to further their personal politic agenda?)

Yesterday Akin said he had to continue his campaign because it was “providential”, determined not by him but by God. (That’s what providential means: determined by God).

In a tweet today, the purportedly apologetic Akin said ‘I misspoke one word in one sentence on one day.’ That’s the extent of his insight into what he’s done.

Go ahead. Defend that. Akin will have to, every day from now till November 6th.

Go ahead, Akin supporters, defend that. I double dog dare you to defend that without sounding like an idiot incompetent to hold office.

    Spiny Norman in reply to Henry Hawkins. | August 21, 2012 at 2:24 pm

    I wonder if Akin has any clue that, with his “misspeak”, he’s handed the Obama Palace Guard Media a nifty new cudgel that will be used to bash GOP candidates all over the country from now until election day. It will have an effect, and Romney and Ryan will be repeatedly forced to repudiate it, there’s no doubt about that.

    Ragspierre in reply to Henry Hawkins. | August 21, 2012 at 3:00 pm

    I guess the best thing to do now is stanch the bleeding.

    Somebody needs to arm-twist Aiken to put a GOOD PR trainer on his staff, and MAKE him practice.

    This would pay dividends into the future if he’s elected. We can’t have those loose lips sinking ships any more.

      9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to Ragspierre. | August 21, 2012 at 4:36 pm

      PR/professional media training would have done nothing to stop this. As a multi-term congressman, I would think the odds he has had media training before are very high; he should have known how to bridge to another subject. Watch Bill Clinton–he’s a master at bridging to his key message. Ask him a question about anything, and within seconds the conversation has shifted to what he wants to talk about instead. I think this is the point that Akin was trying to make on Dana’s show…he kept saying that those who are concerned about this are “paying attention to politics” and not to what the country needs right now. Well, if you don’t pay attention to politics 80-some-odd days out you’re not going to get yourself elected.

      Akin has handed lots of democrat candidates their key message. No matter the question, just bridge to your key message: “Well I think this about that, and you know the GOP is ignorant of science, anti-woman, hayseeds, etc., etc., etc.

        While I disagree with your assumptions and conclusion, what would you do in the circumstances as they exist?

        The guy is sticking. He COULD win a Senate seat. He MAY be a Senator who could repeat this imbroglio into the future multiple times.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to Ragspierre. | August 21, 2012 at 5:11 pm

          When you haven’t the time for proper testing on whether that sore is cancerous, you lop it off to make sure. Akin wants us to risk the whole body to save the sore.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | August 21, 2012 at 5:36 pm

          So, do I understand you to mean that the Right should lay down in Missouri?

          Henry Hawkins in reply to Ragspierre. | August 21, 2012 at 6:01 pm

          “So, do I understand you to mean that the Right should lay down in Missouri?”

          Der, huh? How in the world did you derive that, lol?

          No. Replace Akin with any warm body that is GOP and do it as soon as possible. Polling since early spring reveals that Missourians want McCaskill out, ABM, similar to ABO. Akin is the only warm GOP body who can’t beat McCaskill now. Cut the sore off. Once replaced and the new race against McCaskill is joined, voters won’t even remember Akin’s name by late September.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | August 21, 2012 at 6:12 pm

          OK, good.

          How? The man is the duly elected nominee.

By digging in his heels Akin has given the Dems ammunition from now until November. Thank you Akin for your selfless action /sarc.

    MAB in reply to MAB. | August 21, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    Why all the thumbs down? I think his statement is indefensible and that he’s a cretin and is doing more harm than anything else. He is taking the focus of what a rotten administration this is when everyone should be working to defeat the Won. He is selfish and far from principled.

      MAB in reply to MAB. | August 21, 2012 at 4:59 pm

      that should be taking the focus “off”

      Henry Hawkins in reply to MAB. | August 21, 2012 at 5:14 pm

      This story is exactly the kind that gets counterlinked all over the blogosphere. Your dislikes are likely from people following links here from Daily Beast, Kos, MSNBC, and other likely suspects.

theduchessofkitty | August 21, 2012 at 2:19 pm

Somebody at Gateway Pundit posted this comment:

“Todd Akin is a hypocrite, and he is putting his political career before what is best for America.

Todd Akin called on then Missouri House GOP leader, Mark Richardson, to quit his post in 1997.

We’ve got to find out if this is true. If so…

Women don’t get pregnant if it is a real rape? Aw come on…. in old Europe rape and pillage defined bio-diversity. It was amazing how many red headed babies were born in central Europe after a Viking tour group came through town.

    Spiny Norman in reply to Anchovy. | August 21, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Which is also why 16 million men (and at least that many women) alive today are believed to be direct descendents of Genghis Khan.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to Anchovy. | August 21, 2012 at 2:40 pm

    That’s what I’m saying!

    All of Latin America and the Caribbean is chock-full of descendants of many women who were raped by “conquistadores” and the like. Think of all the stories of slave women raped by their masters – and getting pregnant as a result. Both Native women and African slaves. Those stories are on chronicles of all the histories of countries in the Western Hemisphere.

      Wait a second duchess. (Caveat: I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t care if Akin stays or goes).

      There’s a couple of differences in definition of rape in the examples you’re providing.

      There’s rape because of lack of consent due to power exchange and there’s live debate over the definitions of Slave “rape” over definitions of “force.” If the master simply ordered his slave into his bed, is that still “rape” for the purposes of the biological functions Akin is claiming exists?

      As for the Conquistadors, how much of the claims of “rape” is historical wishful thinking on the part of “La Raza” in order to justify their claims to be the “Rightful Heirs of the Southwest” due to their “heritage.”

      The language here is important, as the Democrat operatives are trying to make it as expansive as possible because it gives them “war on women” talking points, where it seems like Akin was referring to forcible rape immediately reported to the authorities.

        theduchessofkitty in reply to Chuck Skinner. | August 21, 2012 at 3:24 pm

        I know the difference between “consenting” and “non-consenting”.

        “Mestizaje” in the Western Hemisphere happened with both kinds of circumstances. I’m sure I have some ancestor I don’t know who may have raped some great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandmother of mine somewhere. I also am aware that there probably are lots of “May-I-Please?” and “Wham! Bang! Thank-you, Ma’m” somewhere in my family tree. It’s the past. It happened.

        But as a Latina, I know better than those La Raza PC hoards who want to revise history for their gain. That’s why I just shrugged and said “Big deal!” when I found out that Thomas Jefferson may have fathered a few kiddoes with Sally Hemmings.

        And have you seen that old National Geographic picture of that Afghan girl with those awesome green eyes? Those eyes don’t come from her region, but from some Greek soldier of old guided by Alexander the Great.

          Hi Duchess,

          Yes. I understand the genetics involved. That’s not really what I was getting at.

          More what I was trying to question is there some ground between “Consent” and “Forcible Rape,” especially in the past, due to some temporary or long-term political power imbalance. For lack of a better term, I’ll refer to it as “non-consensual yet peaceful sex.”

          That “lack of force” would remove many of the inter-racial births from the discussion of Akin’s claim (that forcible rape trauma reduces conception likelihood).

          Many of the conquered like to claim “the rape of their people” once the conquerors were gone. Those claims don’t always hold up to historical scrutiny. More likely was that the conquerors took wives and/or concubines and settled in the region.

          “non-consensual yet peaceful sex.” ??

          Hi Sanddog,

          Please read the above context of the statements discussing the use of the term “rape” in historical settings (Master-Slave, Conqueror-Conquered) OVER TIME which may not have been “forcible” (aka by violence) but by a power-imbalance between the parties at hand. More like a form of “submission” to the power imbalance.

          We NOW define rape now as sexual relations “without consent.” In a historical Master-Slave setting, that concept doesn’t make sense, because in that setting, the Slave is your property (i.e. he/she would not have the “right” to consent).

[…] are too big, and this election is simply too important. The right decision is to step aside.”William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection reports that in an interview on Dana Loesch’s radio show today, Akin said he won’t […]

Akin called on colleague to resign for DUI

“Republican lawmakers interviewed yesterday said they were expecting Richardson to step aside. “That is the logical thing, just in terms of keeping our focus on legislation,” said Rep. Todd Akin, R-St. Louis.”

    theduchessofkitty in reply to NewtCerto. | August 21, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Thank You!

    Hey Anne, pick this up and post it.

    Not to mention, this Richardson guy makes the perfect argument against Akin: “I may be drunk, but you’re stupid, and I’ll be sober in the morning!”

I remember when the Senate was chuck full of Statesmen.

From both parties.

Now, they’re chuck full of IDIOTS.

What the hell happened??

(BTW- we sent our very own idiot, Debbie Stabenow–so I’m not pointing fingers)

He can try to posture as a victim of the big bad party, but he’s still going to lose overwhelmingly in a race the GOP should win handily. It’s especially obnoxious for Akin to claim he has some “principle” on his side. He has no principled stance. He’s a reprehensible fool.

The man shut down his phones — campaign AND LEGISLATIVE OFFICES — during this controversy. O

On top of the public denunciations he’s getting from all quarters of his party!

In other words, he’s a baby. Putting his hands over his ears, screaming “Na-na-na I can’t hear you! I won fair and square! I’m the candidate! I love my family! I won! Na-na-na I can’t hear you!”

How can anyone trust him, on that alone?

Midwest Rhino | August 21, 2012 at 3:27 pm

At least Republicans are now on record as opposing the idea of “no exception for rape victims” … or at least most of them are, it seems.

Many believe that “new life starts at conception”. But the egg and sperm separately have life, so we need a degree of practicality, especially when mandating lifestyles for others. Especially when we need to win an election to save our country. Not all Republicans want to be martyrs for the few “uncompromising” fundamentalists.

It bothers me that some Christians seem to relish the idea of being “hard core” in their abortion fight, seemingly willing to watch candidates lose rather than compromise. They at times almost relish the idea that the world will get worse, Jesus will return, and THEN these evil men will be punished. Till then they wear their Christian “suffering”, as a badge of honor, awaiting the end times.

Romney and others can now clarify their positions that they believe the states can rule on this issue. This issue should be preemptively cleaned up now, taking it off the October table. Akin can still win, but he will get his support from the more extreme fundamentalists. It will be clear (hopefully) that his more extreme views will not see light of day in a Republican committee.

And I sure wish the Tea party would not be confused with the Christian fundamentalists. There is some overlap, but the Tea party is about smaller government. Forcing a raped woman to keep an unwanted pregnancy seems like Big Government.

Akin seems to be relying on the thin hopes of that silly PPP poll, with it’s R+9 sample (nearly twice as good as our best recent performance in Mizzou). Because of his misplaced ambition, we will probably not be able to win the Senate and will therefore not be able to rid ourselves of ObamaCare.

Todd Akin is the new “deciding vote” in favor of ObamaCare. It’s as simple as that.

All right if we are going to have the discussion about rape and abortion, let’s go. Read this from the National Review

Since when, if we really believe that abortion and rape are wrong, do two wrongs make a right? Since when is murder a solution to a rape?

    No. We are not interested in these idiosyncratic discussions about rape and abortion.

    Not with an unreasoning ecclesiastical mob who doesn’t have the power to prevent the rape in the first place but presumes to turn the victim’s uterus into a kangaroo court where she’s also arbitrarily tried for “murder”. Despicable.

    Not when we are 11 weeks away from the most important election in human history.

    Not when the country’s salvation hangs on the tenuous thread of swing voters whom grassroots have worked so hard to frame the choice as ultimately between the final rescue of America’s liberties and economy or its final annihilation.

    Only to be undone by some dimwitted, gross caricature of Republicans.

theduchessofkitty | August 21, 2012 at 4:30 pm

I’m giving you this link to the Campaign Spot, so you’ll see a nice list on the many people who have called Akin to withdraw.

One thing that stands out: the GOP establishment and the Tea Party are speaking as one. Even in the form of The Wall Street Journal, Krauthammer, talk radio (including Rush today) and NRO. Think about that for a minute.

The Tea Party and the GOP establishment. Together. As one. Can you say, “Tea Party ascendance”?

And here’s the other side of the coin, from Geraghty himself: Who Isn’t Calling For Akin’s Withdrawal? Claire McCaskill & Planned Parenthood.

As I said before, the Democrats USED AKIN TO THEIR ADVANTAGE. And yet there are people who are defending him. The blind leading the blind. Both will fall into the ditch.

Romney just called on Akin to drop out.

In other words, BOTH the Presidential nominee AND Party Chairman have told him to get lost.

Right now, he’s defending his idiocy on Hannity’s show. What a smarmy, narcissistic jerk!

How does he think he can win? What motivates idiot like this?

    InRussetShadows in reply to CalMark. | August 22, 2012 at 5:15 pm

    Maybe, just maybe, he’s spent his time running in a primary, and he won the primary. Contrast that against what other people SAY and TELL him to do. Because you rupture a water main doesn’t mean you tear down the whole city.

    That’s what makes him think that he can win.

Loyalty? Akin admitted that he F’d up big time, his party asked him to step aside, but he’s staying. What does that say about loyalty?

    Milwaukee in reply to RightKlik. | August 21, 2012 at 9:12 pm

    If Akin wanted to show loyalty to the cause he claims to support, then for the good of the conservative movement he would find something else to do.

      InRussetShadows in reply to Milwaukee. | August 22, 2012 at 5:16 pm

      So, for the good of the cause, comrade, he should listen to what outsiders tell him to do? Don’t you know that people outside of the campaign and not from the state are usually right and always have your best interests at heart?

      Oh, wait…

theduchessofkitty | August 21, 2012 at 4:42 pm

Romney just took his dagger and sank it into Akin:

Romney: Akin Needs to Quit

People got a bit euphoric after the Ryan announcement. But who really thought this battle wouldn’t be agonizing, or that we’d escape the self-inflicted wounds of unnecessary idiocy. Akin is an unnecessary idiot, but we’re stuck with him it seems. Idiots will always be with us.

There is a good reason McCaskill spent over $1 million in primary ads portraying Akin as the most conservative – she was baiting conservatives to vote for him.

Akin has a long history of stupid or nonsensical statements – look at his first ad after winning the primary – and THIS WILL NOT BE THE LAST. I have no doubt he is a good man at heart, but he is clearly in over his depth and needs to get out of the pool before the yellow wave engulfs us all.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to Estragon. | August 21, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Exactly! I’ve been saying this repeatedly.

    This was a trap. A Democrat trap. And over a third of MO voters feel into it.

    This was an act of political sabotage – plain and simple.

Atkin is staying in – he just handed a win to Obama. With the media covering Obama’s backside they are going to hammer the war on women meme. Oh God please help us!!!

    1. Atkin is staying in – he just handed a win to Obama.

    It may not be that bad, but I won’t flat-out say you’re wrong.

    As I post from time to time, it is difficult to remove even a terrible incumbent President. Akin has just made that difficult task even more difficult.

    2. A jaw-dropping thing is that Akin apparently thinks that he is the victim, that he is owed an apology from the GOP. Iirc a LIan has noted that Akin may have set the anti-abortion movement back by years—and he walks around holier than thou.

    3. As Akin explains God’s will for America (as revealed to…Todd Akin), he may provide even more material to the Left. He will not leave the Democrats’ campaign material; he may return to the headlines.

    What a mess.

    InRussetShadows in reply to Granny55. | August 22, 2012 at 5:26 pm

    No. One man staying in the race is not going to hand the presidential race to Obama. Please, since you reference God, operate on your faith instead of your fears.

    If the Dems want to hammer this guy, they’re going to have to bring up abortion and run on it. That is a losing proposition, especially in the South.

    Net effect: probably nothing.

NY Times
Todd Akin (R) the party’s newly elected nominee

NY Times
Mitt Romney (R) the party’s presumptive nominee


huskers-for-palin | August 21, 2012 at 5:00 pm

Question: After the general election, if the GOP has 50 Senate votes, can they still repeal Obamcare via reconciliation? I thought “yes” but wanted to make sure.

If so, hope none of the RINOs get cold feet.

Summary of Hannity interview:

Akin: It’s not about me. It’s a matter of principle. (Cue patronizing tone and patriotism in which scoundrel takes refuge.)

Hannity: Are you the only one who can do this? Why not let one of your opponents do this, if it’s about principle?

Akin: It’s not about me. It’s about America. The people of Missouri chose me. So I’m the candidate. I won! Romney & Co. can pack sand, those overreacting idiots.

    Another point that Akin flagrantly ignores: only a psycho or a bare-faced liar would claim that Akin would win a primary today. If Hannity didn’t point that out, he should have.

      CalMark in reply to gs. | August 21, 2012 at 5:58 pm

      Hannity did that later in the interview.

      Akin: I won, I won, I won! I won! Neener-neener!
      Hannity: But that was before you made your mistake.
      Akin: Um. But this isn’t about me. It’s about America!

      InRussetShadows in reply to gs. | August 22, 2012 at 5:19 pm

      Well, it’s comforting to play “what if” games, but reality doesn’t provide us those options, now does it? The fact remains is that he won the primary.

Henry Hawkins | August 21, 2012 at 5:28 pm

Remember how long it took Anthony Weiner to accept that emailing photos of your, er, Weiner around is grounds for a immediate involuntary career change? Today’s deadline was for withdrawal without a court order, but it was by no means a final deadline.

Given what Akin said, thank HEAVEN the GOP leadership came out immediately against him. Now, when a GOP candidate is confronted by liberal media with the Akin episode (the guilt by association inevitability), that candidate can say:

“Yes, and we immediately and uniformly voiced our disgust and demanded he remove himself from the race. We only wish the Democrat Party would police its own as we have, given they have an Attorney General held in contempt of Congress, and a cabinet member in Janet Napolitano of Homeland Security being sued for sexual harrassment, and yet, no Democrat calls for their removal. Clearly, their behavior is acceptable to the Democrat Party. Well, we in the GOP hold principles and country above politics and party.”

    CalMark in reply to Henry Hawkins. | August 21, 2012 at 5:37 pm

    Akin leaving under his own power would mean possible rehabilitation. Instead, he’s doubling down: he’s above mere party interests; he’s about America, and to the devil with the GOP if they disagree with him. No one is going to tolerate a loose cannon like that.

    If the GOP (somehow, unusually) gets its act together and forces Akin out, his political career is done pretty much forever. And he will be despised and reviled by just about everybody in the Republican Party.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to CalMark. | August 21, 2012 at 6:16 pm

      I’m suggesting that in a week’s time, if/when he’s down 20 pts in the polls all of a sudden and has little money and no support, and after the heat of the moment passes, he may finally learn to read, check the wall, and do what’s necessary to get out. That’s basically how it played out for Weiner, despite his early total resistance to resigning. He also has to internally reconcile going against what he believes is his God-commanded mission to assume a US Senate seat.

      I do think the Dems will try to pound all GOP-ers with this no matter what, but I don’t think it will be as effective as they hope – the GOP having come out so strongly and so quickly against Akin can be contrasted by GOP candidates to the Dems’ tolerance of an AG under Congressional contempt, an AG complicit in the killing of hundreds of people including our own agent, a Homeland Security cabinet member facing lawsuit for sexual harrassment, a Dem congressman caught having consensual oral sex with a 17 yr old boy he solicited on craigslist, and on and on, none of whom are being asked to step down by Democrats, the theme being “the GOP, unlike the Dems, places principle and country over party and politics.” That could work very well if doine properly and consistently. Take it from an old amateur boxer – the other guy backs off quick when he gets a stiff jab in the face every time he presses you.

        CalMark in reply to Henry Hawkins. | August 21, 2012 at 7:06 pm

        You are absolutely correct. I believe that sooner or later, he will be forced out, and it’s likely to play out the way you say. I also concur with many of your conclusions.

        My point was that if (when?) it happens as you predict, Akin is done forever. No one will EVER forgot how he sneered at the Party Chairman, the presumptive nominee, and the entire party from grassroots to pundits to poo-bahs.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to CalMark. | August 21, 2012 at 8:02 pm

          Oh, he’s absolutely done, I agree. Akin is not a young man and this may be a big factor in his hanging on against all reason (and I mean that literally – against all reason). He probably felt he had this election in the bag, me, Todd Akin, US Senator!My legacy is assured! and in an instant.. POOF’s all gone. By his own doing.

          I’m guessing it takes a few days to process that, eh?

          CalMark in reply to CalMark. | August 21, 2012 at 11:32 pm

          Mr. Hawkins, I agree with you.

          There is undoubtedly something very wrong with Mr. Akin.

          Irrational acts:
          – Cuts off grassroots feedback by shutting down ALL his phones then claims undying grassroots support.
          – Sneers at everyone in his party, claiming undying support from nameless “close as brothers” people.

          He’s either an egomaniac, nuts, or evil. I vote for the first two.

      InRussetShadows in reply to CalMark. | August 22, 2012 at 5:23 pm

      No-one is going to tolerate a loose cannon like that, eh? The way the GOP has demonized Palin (and dare I say it, Paul) gives evidence of your point. However, I don’t think that many conservatives and zero libertarians would want to belong to such a party. It’s also against the principles of state’s rights if the national party crushes representatives of individual states at will.

      However, I’m beginning to think that discussions of principle are a bit lost on LI readers, in general.

Anne : I think you layed out the situation very well and said what needed to be said.

InRussetShadows | August 22, 2012 at 5:38 pm

When pushed, the GOP acts just like liberals – no room for humanity – no room for a man making a single mistake in weeks and weeks of a brutal primary. Why, everyone should be perfect, and they should always say everything perfectly, and if they don’t, then we dump them, call them names, and spread lies about them – it’s the conservative way! Except that it’s not.

A man saying one thing one time is not evidence of stupidity. That is called a mistake, or an error, or a gaffe. Stupid is CHARACTERISTIC that comes from a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR. It is not a singularity. If you decide to vote against someone on the basis of a single statement and then try to justify that by referring to things other people said that you didn’t care about months ago, YOU ARE PART OF THE IRRATIONAL MOB. In short, you are acting like liberals in their illogical, emotional, knee-jerk, foaming-at-the-mouth insanity.

What Akin said was a poor choice of words. As one human to another, I’m gonna give him some slack on that. I’m glad that he’s staying in. Let the RINOs, the bloody-handed abortion lovers, and the moralless Realpolitik apparatchiks tremble.