Skip to comments.If you were trying to impress a person, would you use the term, "legitimate rape"?
Posted on 08/21/2012 10:47:31 PM PDT by DallasBiff
Hubris cuts both ways, be it democrat or GOP, which will be the first to finally cut down hubris.
It looks like the GOP, which took the brave stand, to stand up to the hubristic Todd Akin, and say that verbal hubristics do have consequences.
He apologized, sounded very heartfelt. How come Christians and Conservatives always shoot our wounded?
He(Akin) wounded himself. Now would yourself an adult bluecollarman, use a term, such as "legitimate rape" to impress people? My guess would be no. Why do we have to apologize for an over 60 Todd Akin.
You are so right. He apologized, even though we all know he was right.
Some things are just too uncool. That sad part he probably believes it. This wasn’t a Biden gaffe..
I happen to agree with you. This long time rep from Missouri benefitted from McCaskill’s PACs running ads for him during the primaries and trashing his opponents. This man is a fraud at best and just down right disgusting and hypocritical at worst. His ego is soooo big that he is willing to run the risk of not having a majority in the senate so he can have his day in the spotlight. Well he will get his 15 minutes.....I hope it doesn’t cost us anything more than his fading into the sunset...because he will lose his house seat too
Yeah, just like when Clinton said, "it depends on what the meaning of is, is"
This guy is going to lose to McCaskill. She and her PAC supported Akin during the primary because she wanted to run against this dolt. Shooting our own??? Not hardly. The man has a squish record in the house. He has hidden and done nothing. His introduced bills are for things like naming post offices and other such nonsense. He hasn’t the brains to blow his own nose.
IF he was a man of honor he would put his ego aside and do what is best for the country...get out of the race and support someone who can beat McCaskill.
did he really apologize? It looks to me like he said he “misspoke”. I don’t think anybody believes that he misspoke including Mr. Akin himself and that’s the problem.
Akin used the word to mean "true" or "genuine" rape. He did not claim there exists such a thing as some sort of justifiable rape (as in justifiable homicide), as the baying morons would have it. As anyone with normal fluency in English would understand, he meant to distinguish truly reported forcible rape from statutory rape and falsely reported rape (for the purpose of availing oneself of a rape exception in abortion law).
that a woman has a defense reproductive mechanism against rape is unacceptable.
That's a scientific question. Akin did cite "doctors". You can find studies supporting and refuting his contention. Questionable? Yes. But "unacceptable" is an unacceptable characterization.
I will agree, he acted stupidly. He should not have ventured where he ventured. He should have changed the subject or dismissed abortion policy as a matter for the states, not the US Senate (except for judicial appointments), or told a heart-warming story about a child raised by a rape victim who went on to be a great American.
Much ado about nothing.
I think all Aikin meant was that if a woman is raped because she was wearing provocative clothing, then she wasn’t legitimately raped. She was asking for it. I think that’s all Aikin meant. He just said it clumsy.
Back in the 1960’s the phrase “legitamate rape” had no meaning. But roundabout the late 80s / early 90s, liberal “researchers” began redefining rape to include all sorts of things that weren’t in the law books.
Read “Who Stole Feminism” by Christina Sommers. Chapter 10, “Rape Research.”
What offends me is the phrase “rape is rape.” This suggests that a violent, forcible rape by a complete stranger is no worse than consenting sex between two people where one of them happens to be below the age of consent.
If I were trying impress someone, I would have carefully rehearsed my answers to the top ten “gotcha” questions WELL KNOWN to be slung by my opposition. I would wear a clean suit. My hair would be combed. I would make sure that my lunch wasn’t staining my tie. And I would have a spare tie and a spare shirt in case I spewed some food on myself. It’s grossly unfortunate that a slip of the tongue on this guy’s part did him in, but it did.
I was posting on a “chess” thread the other day, and I opined that a good chess player must not only know strategy, but he/she must know the most common openings and the most popular variations thereof. Those can be learned systematically, by rote, from books. Why? Because a mediocre player who really knows openings can develop a winning advantage early in the game against a very good player just by knowing some slick openings.
I have a been a working musician at many times in my life. When it comes time to play a solo, although I consider myself a very strong improviser, I insist on knowing a “prefab” beginning or two or three) for tunes I will be called to solo on every night. Just the first half dozen notes or an opening figure is enough. Why? Because it is not every night that I can count on being a fountainhead of creativity able to pull stuff out of the air. Maybe I do not use my Sears catalog solo-start. Maybe I do. It is part of being a pro, of being prepared.
This is the same. This is what is known as “your playbook”. Not having one is a dead giveaway for being an amateur. Sad but true. We don’t have to like it. But it is a fact of life. It’s a darned shame that this error was made and blah blah blah, but it plays so well into the “war on women” dialog. This stuff hurt the Tea Party badly, fatally, in the case of Sharron Engle and Christine O’Donnell. Have we learned anything from those experiences? True, 0bama is hurting, we think. True, McCaskill is not well liked in MO. Maybe that will allow this guy to squeek by. Maybe not. Politics in 2012 is not a game for amateurs but more importantly, the election of 2012 is so crucial in so many ways that we cannot afford this kind of gimme. Especially one that will echo so badly and plays right into their trap. This was a “not ready for prime time” error, but even worse, it will likely become a talking point that won’t go away, it plays into a liberal meme, and it detracts from the economy dialog which is infinitely more important. If I had faith that the GOP could freeze and mock the Dems Alinsky-style for what will unquestionably be relentless attempts to smear the GOP with this, I could overlook it. But I have no such faith, and this guy staying in is ego-driven and amateurish. I also deeply resent that we end up stuck on stupid over this.
He is either too dumb or too ego-maniacal to know any better.
Wasn’t rape once defined as “carnal knowledge of one human being by another, by force and without consent”? How and when was that changed?
He clearly engaged his mouth before his brain. It happens.
At least he can see how ridiculous his statement sounds. Rep. Hank Johnson is still trying to figure out why too many people on an island would not cause it to capsize.
Life is not fair and neither is politics in the U.S. The MSM controls the dialogue to further the agenda of the left. This story has provided another opportunity for the MSM to divert attention away from things that reflect negatively Obama.
By the way, I don’t support abortion even in the instance of rape. I know many wonderful families that would adopt that child and love him/her.
We need leaders who truly understand the opposition and don't just shout at them over a podium when congress is in session.
I agree that he was probably referring to non statutory rape, but to suggest the scientific idiocy that women almost never get pregnant from rape is laughable. If smart, which appears he is not, he should have checked the facts and then said he was very wrong about his “scientific” interpretation and begged forgiveness from all women.
“Much ado about nothing.”
I’m a woman and an RN. I pretty much have to agree. Back in High School over 30 years ago, statutory rape was talked about, with 18 year old high school senior boys afraid of dating younger class mates. The mantra was “all she has to say is ‘statutory rape’ and your life is over.” That didn’t keep kids from %^&*ing like rabbits. It just had them living in fear for it. What he said was very ill thought out, but to be crucified over it seems a bit extreme. The man can’t single handedly change abortion policy. What is it with eating our own? Biden makes gaffes repeatedly, yet one gaffe on our side and it’s tantamount to the death penalty.
As a person, he should be forgiven for his mistake. As a candidate that doesn’t have any chance anymore, and with his presence distracts other important races that might affect the very cause he’s championing, we need to move on from him.
Oh for goodness sakes. Of course he must have meant a genuine rape, and not a jutifiable one.
But the point is that the media spin has hit such a pitch that he can never recover and yet win.
If this dolt wanted to run for senate, he should’ve improved his language skills. Better yet, he shouldnt have ventured into this debate without sufficient preparation.
Now its time for him to get out of the way and let someone else take over.
You’re right. Conservative candidates need to know where they’re going to be attacked and trapped. The list of issues and how they need to be handled should be ready all the time.
Like I pointed out before: he meant legitimate as in actual. He was not suggesting that there is such a thing as an illegitimate rape. He meant a rape with all of its strong emotional consequences which plays a role in the health of the victim / person.
This just proves how important it is to master the language lest one be misconstrued or distorted.
Well it is a documented fact that rape victims get pregnant just 5 % of the time hence he made a valid point.
it wasn’t jus that he used the phrase legitimate rape, which would be dumb but not fatal, it is that he said that women couldn’t get pregnant from forcible rape because of biological defenses. By saying that, he admitted his beliefs were based on bad science, and is getting destroyed for it. He walked back that statement today, but too little too late.
[ The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, along with Planned Parenthood, each estimate that 5% of rapes lead to pregnancy. A 1996 study from the Medical University of South Carolina found the same percentage... ]
The facts bear out the Akin's & his doctors' notion.
I just posted a link which PROVES his assertion though.
“This guy is going to lose to McCaskill.”
He is going to lose if we don’t come together and start supporting him. The focus needs to be on McCaskill.
The biological defenses are basically the consequences of the strong emotional distress that occurs to one’s system after a rape & I just posted a source which VERIFIES the basic premise as just 5 % of rape victims get pregnant. Thus there is IN FACT HARD SCIENCE to the notion that rape causes biological defenses to getting pregnant. How else could it be as nature would not perpetuate the progeny of the rapists & would have a logical defense mechanism against it. That does not mean that no one ever gets pregnant from rape but the statistics clearly point out that it is a very small percentage who do thus we all owe Akin an apology for jumping to conclusions based on out own ill-informed presumption.
Both Hank and Akin are stupid.
Probably because they are more concerned for the unborn babies who will not be born because of this man. Akin did more damage to the pro-life movement than some democrats could only wish they could have done.
The pro-life movement is the victim. NOT Akin.
“Wasnt rape once defined as carnal knowledge of one human being by another, by force and without consent? How and when was that changed?”
I’m sure that still counts. Problem is there are now all kinds of other definitions, including where the woman gets to rethink her consent after the fact.
Well, my only point in that was I had heard from medical reports that rape is such a traumatic type of thing that, um, that it, uh, that here is a reaction, said Akin. But thats wrong and thats the second thing that Ive apologized for.
Second, the source you posted said 5% of rapes lead to pregnancy - that's a HIGH number! It doesn't make your point, it refutes it (3% is the average rate of pregnancy). But it is a waste of time to bicker over numbers which may or may not be accurate. Just wake up and try to take in the bigger picture, which is if obamacare isn't repealed next year, it probably never will be. And it can't be repealed without a majority in the senate. And it will be a lot harder to gain a majority if we can't count on MO as a GOP win. Not to mention the potential collateral damage to other candidates in close races..
If you want to understand the science a little better, this is a good start: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/context-and-variation/2012/08/20/here-is-some-legitimate-science-on-pregnancy-and-rape/
Great reply! The libtards set a trap for this dim bulb and he stepped in it. Unfortunately, the “jaws” of the trap were conservatives. By once again allowing the libtards to control the game by controlling the meaning of words.
But I have no such faith, and this guy staying in is ego-driven and amateurish.In all due respect, your post seems a bit "ego-driven" as well. Maybe you could take a look at your plank before removing the speck on Todd's tie. If you want to help save America, vote pro-Life!
It is unacceptable. I still can’t believe he said it.
However, something else is unacceptable to: I’m having so much sex I can’t afford my birth control.
(Of course the later statement would conclude that it was stated by a slut but you would be a fault for thinking this.)
Impress me by defining “illegitimate rape”.
>> He did not claim there exists such a thing as ...
Has any popular conservative personality given Akin the benefit of doubt without the inoculating monologue that conveys the obvious fact that rape is wicked?
The political paralysis on this matter is bewildering.
I refer other posters to a re-reading of your excellent post #10 that puts the Akin matter in its true perspective.
“Impress me by defining illegitimate rape.”
Here is a case:
I think the term makes sense, if you are referring to false rape accusations.
If that is what he meant you can add a level of ahole to his lack of brains.
He does have unique biological theories.
Bill Clinton still gets vetted all over the world even though he's sexually abused women repeatedly over the years.
Akin says something profoundly odd, yet he's gotta go?!
No, I think he meant that a woman who has second thoughts the morning after and reports her encounter as rape isn’t being truthful.
Then there are situations that fall into a grey zone. 17YO men seduced by a 25+YO teacher? Yeah, right. Like I wouldn't sign up for a tour.
Then there are the false claims.
Again, all debatable. Rape is a horrid, violent crime that should be subject to the death penalty. In saying that I'd carefully consider what I label "rape".
Anyways, I'd be willing to overlook the statements if I thought he could win. Screw the left. All I'm interested in is destroying socialist power.
>> >> Impress me by defining illegitimate rape.
>> false rape accusations.
I guess I’m asking: that unless we can define “illegitimate rape”, then it’s not possible to define “legitimate rape”. Now, as you point out, “illegitimate” could mean false, which would make “legitimate” true. As true rape is rape, the modifier, “legitimate”, is valueless as “legitimate rape” is rape.
There’s an argument that states: Akin implied rape to the exclusion of statutory rape. Well, that wouldn’t be a sound legal position for Akin given that statutory rape is rape. Not addressing that distinction is a liability for Akin. That said, I’m not going to suggest Akin is advancing illegal positions on rape — can’t do that without certainty.
The only reasonable conclusion I can draw from the controversial remarks is the following: Akin believes abortion is not acceptable in the case where rape did not occur. I can’t see any other conclusion that doesn’t involve speculation.
I admit to not seeing the follow up interviews, but the bulk of the controversy was based on the initial remarks that I’m familiar with.
And what percentage of single legitimate sexual acts lead to pregnancy. I doubt that it is much higher.