Rep. Todd Akin refuses to step down with support from Sen. McCaskill

Your final paragraph is I think the most important. Yes, Akin's position is consistent with that of the Republican Party. Yet they want him gone. Romney's position is not consistent with that Republican doctrine. yet they do not wish to dump him. Baffling.

My guess is that many who are truly pro-life don't really want any exceptions because while they might have very real sympathy for victims of rape or incest because if you believe that life begins at conception, then regardless of the circumstances surrounding conception, well, life is life is life.

Which leads them into the crazy position that a fertilized egg cell's survival is more important than sparing a traumatized woman the further horror of giving birth to the baby of her rapist. Wow.

I think that's why it isn't something most people really feel comfortable discussing, and maybe why some of those people keep trying to justify this by making it okay somehow by adding "legitimate" or "forcible" to rape.

Basically, there shouldn't even be a discussion over this. Rape is rape, and a resulting conception - well, that's up to the woman, no one else. Some women choose to go through with the pregnancy; many don't. Who is any man to say what a woman must do?

I don't understand what you mean when you say that Romney's position is not consistent with that of the the Republican doctrine. He and his so-called church are, as I recall, anti abortion.

His official position, right now, is that rape victims are entitled to have access to abortion. Republican party does not agree.

Although, I'm not sure it's the whole party. I'm not really sure why the party seems to be swinging further and further to the right on these social issues.

If the whole republican Party disagrees with those who write the official party position, they need to say so. But they remain silent. So I assume they are okay with the extreme no-abortion-for-rape-victims thing.

The main reason Romney is swinging this way now, Chris, is because he is well aware of the anger women nationwide are having at Akin's statements. He wants to be president.

Interesting tidbit I just found on a very Christian pro-life site:

"Without a doubt Akin could have said what he said much differently and with more sensitivity. Also, in the interest of winning the favor of the general public he must also accept the fact that most people today can’t get past the thought of the rape event. His advocacy for protecting the unborn child conceived from a rape is morally correct but at this time is not politically prudent."

Not Politically Prudent. What does that tell ya? This was copied and pasted from Christian Life Resource and was said by Rev. Robert Fleischmann, National Director of Christian Life Resources. The big guy of the place himself - pretty much is saying don't say this stuff now, because you won't get elected. It's not politically prudent.

What Todd Akins said was stupid with no evidence to support his statement. He apologized. Let's move on. If we expect a politician to step down for every time they say something stupid we might as well as abolish government.

Besides, Akins knows nothing about rape. Just ask Bill Clinton. He has first hand experience.

Silly detour. Clinton for all his faults never raped anybody.

I think that Akin should remain the candidate. let's see how he polls in another week.

What difference is one week, the only poll that matters is in november.

Juanita Broaddrick would disagree with you Chris.

Big detour. Also, this has never been adjudicated and Broaddrick nor anyone else made to take the stand.

“Which of the following do you find more troubling? 1) Ted Kennedy kills a woman; 2) Barney Frank runs a homosexual prostitution ring out of his apartment; 3) Bill Clinton is credibly accused of raping Juanita Broaddrick; (4) Todd Akin misspeaks.”

Does that help put this in perspective?

- J. Farah

Todd akin did not misspeak. He meant every word.

1) It was never okay that Ted Kennedy left that woman to die.
2) While a prostitution ring (does it really matter if it was hetero or homosexual?) was run from his home, it has never been proved that Frank knew about it.
3) I still don't if it's true. This doesn't change no matter how many times you might want to repeat it.
4) I don't care one way or another if Akin withdraws. It's up to Missourians.

And really? Not to make more of this than it deserves, but misspeaks? Really? What does that even mean? What did he mean to say then if he misspoke? What could he possibly have meant to say that somehow came out that women can somehow shut down their reproductive organs during an attack?

If you listen to what Mr. Akin Said in its entirety and in context, you may see the fact that he was comparing consensual sex and rape, the fact that he threw in the word "legitimate" is unfortunate and a clear miss speak.

Scientifically a woman can stop or delay ovulation because of a traumatic experience. Thus what Mr. Akin said is true is some very rare situations when a woman is about to ovulate as she is raped. A remote situation but possible.

Mr. Akin is guilty of nothing except some poorly chosen words and being a republican because republicans don’t defend their own. Now the democrats smell blood in the water and McCaskill seat may not be in jeopardy after all. That is what this is all about. Democrats need to stop the phony outrage at the words he used because this is all just politics.

You don't have to rationalize and make excuses Kay Lee. I understand.

The bar for Democrats continues to get lower, while the bar for Republicans continues to be raised.

@Clark V - It's really not up to me if Akin continues in this campaign. It's really up to him, the people of Missouri, and the state Republican party. McCaskill's seat seemed vulnerable until this kerfuffle, but she wanted Akin as an opponent even before all this. Most likely because she polls within the margin of error against him.

@Lee C. I'm not justifying anything. Your points against Frank and Clinton are all conjecture. If you had thrown Rangel into the mix I would have absolutely agreed with you. He should have resigned his seat, but that's the thing. I'm not in his district. The rules apparently don't make his infractions an automatic resignation, and as this is still a free country, he might yet keep his seat if he wins in November. It's up to his constituents.

This works for Akin too. He can run. It's up to him. He hasn't committed any crime except for the non-crime of foot in the mouth up to his knee. I'm not in a position to make any decisions for him. His party seems to want him to step down, and if he's willing to face the consequences of going against the state and national GOP, well, that's his decision.

This is a free country. You can say what you like. You can believe what you like. You can do what you like. Within the confines of the law, obviously.

But again, because this is a free country, and because no one lives in a vacuum, once your actions/speech/thoughts are made clear, you must be prepared to face the consequences.

I am sure that there are Missourians who fully support Akin's position that even in cases of rape, abortion should be illegal. That's their right. And should Akin stay in the race, presumably they will continue to support him.

That doesn't mean that those who disagree with him have to do the same. Those who decide that his views are not their views can either sit out the senate vote or switch to McCaskill or a third party candidate. It's the risk Akin takes in continuing. But it's his risk to take.

Clark V. - speaking as a woman, there is no "science" in being raped. A woman cannot stop or delay ovulation due to a traumatic experience. Her mind, at the moment a rape is occurring, is most likely not focused on "mentally shutting down access to her egg" from the rapist's sperm. It's more focused - if focused on anything at all - on having it be over, or the mind shuts down completely because the experience is so traumatic. The fear of a resulting pregnancy usually happens afterwards - after the initial shock wears off (if it does). Most women are simply numb - fear, pain, trauma - being violated - little children who are sexually abused often deal with it by their minds splitting off in to different personalities - called DID or multiple personality disorder. That is because they don't have the life experience to even put in to words what happens. An adult or teen does - but it doesn't mean the mind doesn't react any less.

Your statement is fact based, Jeanne. Clark's statement is not. We don't need to keep repeating Akin's nonsense about the female body shutting down after rape. It's easily refuted by a simple google search. Have we learned how to use the Internet yet?

So, let me get this straight, Chris and jeanne are both saying that throughout all of humanity that it is not possible, it has never happen, that a pregnancy was prevented by nonconsensual sex? Not one? I doubt you would ever find a doctor that would buy into that statement.

Fact, individual life is finite. Fact, the primary goal of life is survival, both at the individual level and as a species. Thus the only way to achieve that goal is also a secondary goal of life and that is through procreation.
Fact, a woman has a finite number of eggs. Fact the ovulation and menstruation processes can be delayed or stopped in cases of stress and excessive exercise. This process is stopped not actively or voluntarily, but involuntarily. A similar fact, the body is willing to sacrifice limbs in cases of hypothermia, restricting blood flow, in order to save the core, again involuntarily.

Thus the body seems to value every egg and has a desire to save that potential life for a time when the body is not under stress.
This is a key point. Several people have mischaracterized this point or lie. If there is a crime committed, it is this lie, not the mistake that a candidate made by choosing some words poorly, it is the perpetration of false witness. Akin never said that a woman can turn this on or off voluntarily. Nor did I, but that is the point that some of you guys jumped on, falsely.

I forgive him even if he didn't really do any thing wrong.

And I for sure forgive him if the rhinos want him out. Hec I would vote for him if I could now.

Larry - Can I ask you why you think socially conservative Republicans are true to the party, and socially liberal ones are RiNOs? I ask because I've heard this before of course, but I've also heard other Republicans say that they feel it is the other way around and that the party has changed, not them.

Why are Tea Party Republicans not considered RINOs instead of the moderates? Good question. Eisenhower would be very suspicious of Tea Partiers. Things changed.

Mike summed it up well.


If this can happen to Todd Akin, who is next?

I’ve heard the talk of new deadlines and the nonsense about the Republican Party running a 3rd party candidate, but I am no longer listening to that noise. The idea that our Party would continue to play games behind the scenes and feed the Democrats make-believe narrative of the GOP’s fictional war on women is equally ridiculous. Now is the time to focus on electing a conservative Senate Majority. And if the NRSC and RNC and the money-rich PACS won't help Todd Akin get us to the majority, then we'll do it without them. And his seat will not have been sold to the highest bidder, but obtained by the highest principles.

With gratitude,

Mike Huckabee

I think it's the whole picture that's sinking him rather than saving him. Akin is perfectly entitled to his opinion, but the party trying to get as far from his words (even though the actual sentiment is not really different from the party platform), is going to make it difficult for him in the race.

What makes this different from Murkowski is that she never stopped campaigning unlike the next runner up in Missouri. So I don't really know why the party is giving up on Akin since he does seem to be the best bet for them to gain a seat.

After they completely jumped ship, I'm not at all certain Akin can recover if he doesn't drop out. Then again, it's still a couple of months out so who knows?

For all the openy expressed demands by big wigs in the Republican Party, for Mr. Akin to remove himself from contention in the Mssouri Senate race, he scoffed at their threats and held his ground.

Karl Rove and other financial sources, including the RNC's State PAC in Missouri, stated without reservation, that those organizations had decided to end all financial support to/for the Todd Akin for Senate campaign. At hearing this, everyone from the news media to Rush Limbaugh let out one loud gasp of relief, believing that Mr. Akin now had no alternative but to close his campaign. A move which would allow the RNC to putforth a more winnable candidate. However, to the horror of all Republican officials, Mr. Akin called their bluff and refused to end his campaign for the Missouri Senate seat.

As I and others have noted in previous comments posted to other political article here on GN, the RNC needs only to gain four (4) seats in the Senate to win control. A scenario which would then give the Republican Party majority control in both Houses of Congress. Essentially meaning that the RNC would have a virtual lock on all future legislation to be passed in Washington.

With that being the ultimate goal of the RNC and now that Mr. Akin is their candidate in the Missouri Senate race, all those threats have become mute and unenforceable. The RNC has no choice, no alternative and no recourse whatsoever, they must now refute their previous threats and begin to finance Mr. Akin's campaign. Otherwise, they will be almost assurredly forfeiting that seat to the Democrat candidate and the DNC.

Further and far more important,what this points out is quite revealing. Inasmuch, as the authority of the RNC has now been openly challenged by a far rightwing Evangelical extremist candidate within the Republican Party and the challenger won. Before this public incident occured, such challenges were made behind closed doors in the House of the Representatives, with the extremist winning time and time again over the past two years.

Although Mr. Akin is a three term Congressman and therefore can not be seen as a junior Cngressman, his defiance demonstrates how the new wave ideology of Teapublicanism is beginning to take hold and even spreading among some of the old cadre of the Republican Party. In years past, such boldness by a member would have been put in it's place and the senior members and their ideology would have prevailed.

In retrospect, this is the first time in the history of either major political party (RNC / DNC) where junior Senators and Congressman have become the driving force in deciding what the ideology of a party will be within the Halls of Congress. Unless the RNC quickly finds it's loss backbone and decisively moves to reign in these religiously extremist ideologues of the Teapublican wing of the Republican Party, The Halls of Congress will reverberate with gridlock and America will sorely suffer the consequences thereof.

I think we are already there, Scott.

"gridlock" - the best thing that has happened for America since Obama got "elected." It has only slowed our slide towards communism. November will bring it to a halt and put it in reverse.

The Republicans have adopted Aikins's position as an official plank of their party platform for their convention next week.

They were just foolin': he was actually being prophetic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/todd-akin-gop-platform-rape_n_1818532.html

I don't think it's the sentiment that there shouldn't be a rape exception that's caused such an uproar within the party. I think it's more that he vocalized it, and the way he did it.