Sunday Open Thread [8.19.12]
Another glorious day — can Fall be far behind?
Another great video from Team Obama — this time a condensed version of the President’s stump speech:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSPtk6qJXQo[/youtube]
This guy seems as though his swift-boating isn’t working the way he thought it would — at least that is the way it looks from this TV-less household:
An article written by David Frum back in February seems to have a new life on Twitter this AM. This is the article detailing Grover Norquist’s requirements for a GOP president — and apparently all they need is to have someone sign whatever comes out of the Congress:
They have reconciled themselves to a Romney candidacy because they see Romney as essentially a weak and passive president who will concede leadership to congressional conservatives:
“All we have to do is replace Obama. … We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don’t need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. … We just need a president to sign this stuff. We don’t need someone to think it up or design it. The leadership now for the modern conservative movement for the next 20 years will be coming out of the House and the Senate”.
Greg Sargent takes his own paper to task for a clearly wrong bit of “both sides do it”:
The problem is not that both candidates are equally responsible for making this debate impossible. Rather, one candidate is far more than the other for making this debate impossible. The candidate who is far more responsible is Mitt Romney.[…]
Romney, meanwhile, is making claims that are designed to obfuscate, rather than clarify, the differences between the candidates. The Romney camp continues to claim Obama “raided” Medicare for $716 billion to pay for Obamacare, casting Obama as the real threat to Medicare and to seniors. But those savings are wrung from providers, not benefits, and Obamacare lowers costs for the very same seniors Romney and Ryan are pretending to defend from the alleged “cuts” to Medicare.[…]
What interests you today?
http://www.salon.com/2012/08/19/todd_akin_legitimate_rape_stops_pregnancy/
WHAT THE FUCK I CAN’T EVEN
That’s amazing, right? How is it that Republicans are even thinking that this is somehow good judgement?
He will likely win.
How is it possible that Missouri will elect this man without a whole heap of embarrassment?
A number of Missouri Republicans are calling for Akin to drop out. And the Romney campaign has stated “Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan disagree with Mr. Akin’s statement, and a Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape”.
Notice, however, that they don’t say which part Ryan disagrees with, and refer to the administration rather than Ryan himself.
Because Ryan told both the National Right to Life Committee as well as the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he opposes abortion in every case except to save the life of the mother. Like Akin, he also supports the “Personhood” amendment (Eggs are people!) that was defeated in Mississippi last year.
Looks like Romney just lost another news cycle.
What conservatives really believe is that ONLY corporations are people and that life begins at conception and ends at birth.
The his full answer from the interview:
“Well you know, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, well how do you, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. 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 on the rapist and not attacking the child”
Also, both Todd Akin and Paul Ryan were two of the sponsors for HR 3, the bill that made a distinction between “forcible rape”(legitimate rape?) and “statutory rape” for the purposes of providing redress to victims of the former but not the latter.
I think what’s amazing is that he is married and his wife is proabably very supportive of him. I wonder what that says about her?
“I wonder what that says about her?”
That she married a guy who occasionally misspeaks? Great. That makes her one of about 60 million.
Misspeaks? What part of it represents a slip of the tongue rather than a cast of mind?
I’m sure you don’t want that standard applied (pre-edit) to the many “insightful” and “kind” things written here.
“Misspeaks?” I’m not sure I would put that into the category of a verbal gaffe. It sure sounds like a belief as when someone “believes” that there are ways a woman’s body can shut down a pregnancy. Really, that’s not misspeaking that’s a demonstration of ignorance.
If you feel that Congress is so lacking in opportunities to demonstrate their ignorance that this one gaffe stands uniquely apart, then I *believe* you are not living in the same world as the rest of us.
You’re not sure of any such thing. And your attempt to dismiss it by pointing to others’ gaffes is about as convincing as the guy who gets pulled over for speeding whining, “But all those other cars were speeding too!”
He’s a big boy. He can take his lumps. You, on the other hand, are just a douchenozzle.
Ah, the finer elements of Delaware political debate (as DL *believes* it to be) shines through.
Win me over. Educate the unfortunate Mr. Akin. Make your case.
Or just f… the effort and lob a “douchenozzle” or some other witty hate word with misogynistic underpinnings.
I wonder….would your wife so smirkingly toss a “dickcheese” into conversation?
You know, it is up to *you* to make your case here, since you are the new guy lobbing a fair bit of idiocy around here. Make up your mind to add something to the conversation or haul your butt over to Delaware Politics where the content-free is celebrated.
I’m not interested in debating anything with you. YOu have made no case to support your contention, so what’s to debate? I’m sorry, would calling you a “pathetic apologist” have satisfied your appetite for more accurate abuse?
I doubt my wife has ever heard the term “dickcheese,” but I’m sure she’d agree with me that you’re a dick.
My case is that one overhyped foot-in-mouth moment (a convenient HEY LOOK AT THAT SQUIRREL! opportunity for a national campaign lacking in any gravitas so far), or a truly backassward belief of one otherwise uninteresting lesser candidate doesn’t measure up to the padded trousers strutting going on here at DL.
All piss, no johnson.
As far as debate….is “open thread” just a misnomer?
Sometimes, these so-called “misspeaks” tell us nothing at all. At other times, they tell us almost more than we’d like to know.
Debate occurs when you express an idea and then back it up. I pointed out that “misspeaks” is inaccurate. You failed to cite anything in opposition to my statement; you just fell back on the discredited notion of “other people say stupid things” to avoid discussion of this particular stupid statement.
So, in short, you got nothin’. Understood.
It was not a foot in mouth moment. It was an expression of his beliefs. Your inability to distinguish the difference is nobody’s problem but your own.
My refusal to waste any time “refuting” your lazy contention or “winning over” a lazy commenter who attributes the attention this is getting to the Obama campaign instead of the gaffe-seeking media is a direct response to your lack of seriousness as a “debater.”
Discuss his statement all you like. Leave the wife-bashing and other “gashy” humor at the door. That’s where you lost me.
Get some more blooper classics from Akin. Connect the dots to policy/platform.
I expect nothing less from the fervent supporters of the articulate, bright, clean and nice-looking politicians who walk among us, free of chains……y’all.
So OK, you’re a dick, not a douchenozzle. Feel free to choose whichever insult will make you go back to sucking your own dick the quickest.
As noted before, you got nothing. Attacking Obama, who has nothing to do with the story, shows that you lack the intellectual capacity to debate anything with anyone. And you’re in no position to demand anyone else do any research when you can’t even get the underlying facts straight.
Piss off, johnson.
There was no wife-bashing or “gashy” humor (whatever the heck that is).
And you make no rules here. If you don’t like the conversation, then step off.
See you at the next shiny object.
Not if you’re this content free, you won’t.
I expect a bit more intellectual repose from you, Cassandra.
I pointed out the lack of any evidence to assign character flaws to Akin’s wife, other than her likely common experience of being married to a man with no verbal “pause button.” I extended that to a brief discussion of the existence of copious oral butterfingers within the noble halls of legislation.
I then thoroughly enjoyed the genitally-laced insults flung at me by the DL brain trust.
Almost spilled my tea.
Since I made the comment (or rather, asked the question), I was not assigning any character flaws to his wife per se. What I was suggesting is that his wife must be pretty loyal (and in love) to have been married to him for any length of time without disputing his beliefs, which must have come up in conversation at some point given that Akin’s is very outspoken.
The same kind of the question was asked about Hilary, in response to Bill’s actions when they remained married.
Sometimes I am bit too subtle. Akin’s is the idiot. I don’t know his wife, so I can’t call her an idiot. But I curious about what she believes.
What you failed to do was back up your claim that Akin has “no verbal pause button” or that he was an “oral butterfingers.” Then you got your victim on.
Typical conservative troll.
Well, more inarticulate than most. “Intellectual repose”? “Genitally-laced”?
Fair enough Dave, but I still think the incredulity you have as to how she could be “married to him for any length of time without disputing his beliefs” has its own shortcomings.
Hill and Bill weren’t exactly June and Ward Cleaver.
Geezer….keep up the fight, soldier.
On a positive note, that right there was one of your few crotchless posts.
Hope springs eternal.
“Misspeak” is when you say something you didn’t mean. Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that Todd Akin doesn’t actually think that women’s bodies somehow prevent them from getting pregnant when raped? Do you seriously think that Todd Akin isn’t more worried about women claiming to be raped so they can get an abortion than about helping rape victims?
This isn’t a poor choice of metaphor – this is a man stating what he believes and what his priorities are, with a statement that both proves him extremely ignorant (not surprising for someone who opposes sex education) as well as extremely callous.
That’s conservatives for ya. Sympathy ends at birth, then you can pretty much die for all they care.
You’ll note, incidentally, that his “apology” neither takes back a single word nor contradicts what he said originally. It is the latest in a long line of Republican “I’m sorry what I firmly believe makes you angry” apologies.
“Hill and Bill weren’t exactly June and Ward Cleaver.”
Better than former Illinois GOP Governor Jack Ryan, right? Or did I suddenly remind you that irrelevant examples are irrelevant?
““married to him for any length of time without disputing his beliefs” has its own shortcomings.”
Of course it does! Everything I say has shortcomings. I do not perfectly articulate my thoughts. The point is, he has been married and it makes me wonder whether his wife shares his beliefs. I mean she is a woman and all.
Still I don’t want to get to far afield, since this is about what someone who is making decisions for the nation believes and who acts upon those beliefs when making those decisions. Akins is an Evangelical with a Masters of Divinity. That shapes his beliefs and actions. When that faith is antithetical to established and accepted science I worry.
Still typing without saying anything, I see. Maybe if you used two hands?