General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMourdock, Akin unmask the anti-choice crowd
The latest entrant into the Republican rape insensitivity bake-off is Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock, who said tonight that even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen. He, of course, joins fellow Senate candidate Todd Akin, with his now-canonical legitimate rape comment, and Rep. Joe Walsh, running for election in Illinois, who claimed there was no reason a woman would ever need an abortion to save her life or preserve her health. The trailblazer was tea party candidate Sharron Angle, who failed to unseat Harry Reid in Nevada two years ago, and famously said that if a hypothetical teenager was raped and impregnated by her father, it was an opportunity to turn a lemon situation into lemonade.
Heres why this is happening: The newer crop of Republican candidates and elected officials, are, more often than not, straight from the base. Theyre less polished than their predecessors; theyre more ideologically pure. As a result, theyve accidentally been letting the mask slip and showing whats really at the core of the right-to-life movement.
For years, the movement has fought plausible charges that it is anti-woman by repackaging its abortion restrictions, in Orwellian fashion, as protections for women. Theyve done it so successfully that until recently, when so many alleged gaffes went viral, no one really noticed. What is the so-called Womens Health Defense Act? A proposed ban on abortion before viability. What are informed consent laws purporting to give women all the information they need before having abortions? Forced ultrasounds, transvaginal, and some of them involving the forced viewing of the ultrasound, at the womans expense, under the stated supposition that she has no idea whats growing inside her unless someone makes her look. (Never mind that 60 percent of women who have abortions have already given birth at least once.)
For now, anti-abortion absolutists have some explaining to do, and theyre doing it very, very badly. Thats because they arent used to cloaking their views in the rhetoric of compassion, something George W. Bush was so much better at. Theyre used to how the base talks about this stuff amongst itself, when its open about seeing women as vessels whose decision-making is subsumed to Gods plan or to baby making. (Paul Ryan is ideologically aligned with this crowd, but usually has the political skills and earnest manner to keep him out of trouble. When he got asked in the debate about religion, he answered by talking about science.)
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/24/richard_mourdock_misogynist/
The article make a great point, they're not more crazy than before they were always this crazy. They just did much better job of hiding it than before.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Zalatix
(8,994 posts)They'll be out there attacking him ANY SECOND NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Freddie
(9,275 posts)Chilling.
"The life of the baby comes first, and shouldn't the father have a say here?"
"The only reason women forgave Clinton for his zipper problem was that he's fine with them killing their babies."
"Tie her to a chair for 9 months, that baby deserves life!"
Talk about exposing the underbelly, I had to stop reading.