Skip to main content

Mitt Romney and Richard Mourdock campaigning together.
BFFs Mitt Romney and Richard Mourdock
Not an original idea—but there's a reason people like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock are saying the things they are saying. It's because they believe them. It's as if you said, "I love my mother," and the whole country exploded in outrage. You'd be rightfully puzzled. You'd think, "why, obviously I love my mother, why the freakout?" at the same time people were demanding that you apologize. Why would you apologize for loving your mother?

And that's where the modern GOP finds itself—completely out of the American mainstream on issue after issue. Yet they live in their safe little bubbles with Fox News and wingnut radio and internet telling them the things they want to hear without the messiness of reality getting in the way.

So then they say crazy things about rape, or claim that President Barack Obama never called the Benghazi attacks an act of terror, or that it's the Democrats who are trying to suppress the vote, or that only sluts want birth control, they are genuinely shocked when reality smacks them hard upside the head.

This is the same crowd that spent the entire primary season arguing that Republicans needed to move right in order to defeat Obama, forcing Mitt Romney into his "severe conservative" caricature. Yet in the general, it wasn't until Romney moved far to his left that he regained some modicum of competitiveness. The "severe conservative" version of Romney was going nowhere fast. Some conservative country, huh?

Support for marriage equality is increasing fast, and three states are poised to legalize it at the ballot box. People still want access to their birth control. Young voters are the most tolerant ever of ethnic, racial, geographic and sexual orientation differences. With their strongest supporters aging and dying off, the culture wars aren't going well for the Right.

But no one told them. In fact, their media bubble shields them from the bad news. So they persist as if all goes well, and we get the Akins and Mourdocks and Donald Trumps of the GOP. And the Romneys as well, because no conservative is immune.

Originally posted to kos on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:39 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (132+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    B o o, DEMonrat ankle biter, rebop, Merry Light, OrangeMike, ontheleftcoast, Dreaming of Better Days, myadestes, JCPOK, IARXPHD, Catkin, oxfdblue, detroitmechworks, crystal eyes, arizonablue, Pinto Pony, JayRaye, rigcath, TomP, Shawn Russell, zerelda, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, tardis10, homo neurotic, Empower Ink, jeepdad, spooks51, cyncynical, Aunt Pat, catly, Sun Tzu, coquiero, inclusiveheart, ApatheticNoMore1966, gloriana, Its any one guess, Pandora, koosah, implicate order, Phil S 33, legalchic, Bob Friend, Anthony Page aka SecondComing, redstella, wynns world, john07801, kevinpdx, gizmo59, turn blue, lillyspad, dbradhud, camlbacker, maryabein, MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel, Statusquomustgo, Ed in Montana, get the red out, kurious, jazzence, newpioneer, kestrel9000, TexDem, ColoTim, 3goldens, mconvente, mjshep, Lost Left Coaster, Railfan, defluxion10, TH Seed, The Zipper, SaintC, henrythefifth, GeorgeXVIII, SoCaliana, leonard145b, Shockwave, jfromga, mofembot, sockpuppet, Front Toward Enemy, D in Northern Virginia, TX Unmuzzled, renzo capetti, swampyankee, CwV, Loudoun County Dem, anodnhajo, thatpj, Mber, icebergslim, mdmslle, pattym922, CroneWit, dkosdan, wesinCA, valadon, lilsky, Gowrie Gal, a2nite, jnhobbs, LaraJones, wagdog, Vatexia, Curt Matlock, Im with Rosey, Kristopher, rbird, vigilant meerkat, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, shaharazade, elginblt, G2geek, dewtx, sfbob, rja, sagansong, Pandoras Box, DSPS owl, mchestnutjr, bythesea, DarkHawk98, Jujuree, shelley1, LinSea, ParkRanger, luckylizard, thomask, mayim, George3, Larsstephens, Smoh
  •  Hard to fathom WHY they believe the (16+ / 0-)

    claptrap handed down from on high at the daily talking points meeting.  

    I really don't understand the women that buy into this crap. Maybe they can't think for themselves!

    -6.50/-5.23 "Don't find fault, find a remedy." - Henry Ford

    by Merry Light on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:44:45 AM PDT

    •  They think that magical money dumping fairy (14+ / 0-)

      will come visit them if they kowtow to the masters enough.

      WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

      by IARXPHD on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:45:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "the Money Fairy": Instant viral meme! (5+ / 0-)

        Why do some members of the working class vote for Romney?

        Because they believe in the Money Fairy.

        That's just brilliant: it captures a large set of points in one simple three-word phrase:  "the Money Fairy."  

        "Minus two votes for the Republican" equals "plus one vote for the Democrat." Arithmetic doesn't care about their feelings either!

        by G2geek on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:41:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Same thing with the Log Cabin Republicans. (18+ / 0-)

      Complete disconnect with reality.

      •  Totally different dynamic, though (13+ / 0-)

        LCRepublicans are fueled by money, financial issues, not belief.

        Anti-choice women are fueled by the strongest religious and personal morality beliefs about abortion.

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:58:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  But they also believe against all evidence that (8+ / 0-)

          Rmoney and the Republican leadership will be amenable to considering their points of view on things like workplace protections.  There was a diary yesterday on that where that was their payoff for endorsing Mitt.  They've never been given any sign that their leadership will actually follow through on protecting LGBT in the workplace and they've seen measure after measure where the GOP rejects any governmental regulation that prevents a business owner from doing whatever they damn well please to their employees.

        •  Honestly (8+ / 0-)

          no.  That may be for many. Especially the religious right voter.

          Many women aren't concerned about it because they feel safe.  They figure it isn't an issue for them personally.  If they did get raped, they could have one.  Rape is the exception.  And most women who are anti choice use birth control.  All other women use birth control.  And birth control is always available.  If you use too much or it doesn't work, you are a slut.  A baby will teach you.  Next time you will be more careful.

          Not my fault you are slut.

          This moves down the list of important issues.  Fox News and general stupidity explain the rest.  If you have to explain to a women that the levels of rape argument shows that our rights are not safe anymore, then they are stupid or something else is going on.

          "There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order." Ed Howdershelt

          by Lava20 on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:29:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Those are the ones I'm talking about (4+ / 0-)

            the devoutly, intensely anti-choice women, who are anti-choice based on strong reasons of personal morality/ethics.

            Basing this on many years experience with a sibling who fits the category.

            Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

            by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:42:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You (0+ / 0-)

              don't understand them or you do and think there is something we can do?

              When you say ethics you mean the slut part.  They are anti choice because of religion and or ethics?

              "There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order." Ed Howdershelt

              by Lava20 on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:07:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I understand them pretty well, I think (0+ / 0-)

                I spent many years listening and trying to make sense of it for my own sanity. Not for any purpose beyond understanding.

                To the ones I'm most familiar with, there is no difference between morality and ethics, so what we might delineate (at least what I delineate), my sister can not make sense of -- the distinction is meaningless to her since she can only make sense of "ethics" as ""morality"

                When I say ethics, I mean the whole of the modern, secular moral/ethical imperative, because I don't like the term morality, it carries too much religious connotation for my own thinking.  I mean the entire religio-moral-ethical-social compact thing that we have as human beings and how we guide our actions and values. How we answer the question "what is the right-the just-the kind-the compassionate-the decent thing to do?

                And I don't know if there is something we can do or not.  I doubt it.  But even if there were, I wouldn't be doing it, because persuasion is not my bag.

                They are, at least in my exposure to it and my experience of trying to understand it, anti-choice because of what they call "moral" reasons, which is a whole conglomeration of religious and ethical and humane and philosophical values, all lumped together under the nomenclature of "morality" and all attributed to G*d, and explained by their ministers.

                Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

                by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:47:34 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  what percentage of those women are... (0+ / 0-)

              post menopausal?  those women, in particular, have no say about a woman's choice.  post menopausal women are past being concerned about becoming pregnant.

              I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

              by blue drop on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:37:12 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, we are. But we're the ones (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                blue drop, a gilas girl

                who fought the fights of the 70s.

                The Republicans are defunding, not defending, America.

                by DSPS owl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:35:02 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  i should rephrase the question (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  DSPS owl

                  i realized as i hit the "post" button that it may have been construed too broadly when i specifically intended the question to be --

                  what percentage of those anti-choice women are post-menopausal?

                  I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

                  by blue drop on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:49:32 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'd guess (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    DSPS owl

                    probably the same percentage of pro-choice women who are menopausal.  The choice question cuts across all generations.

                    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

                    by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:52:55 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  i guess what i'm still striving to say... (0+ / 0-)

                      is that anti-choice women who are post-menopausal have no say in the matter, just as anti-choice men have no say about a woman of childbearing age and her right of choice.

                      it seems to me that many of the anti-choice women running for Congress (or already there) fall into that category of post-menopausal and they are making the rules for other women, for whom pregnancy is still a concern.  they get no say.

                      I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

                      by blue drop on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 03:37:51 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  not true (0+ / 0-)

                I myself can no longer become pregnant, but that doesn't make any less concerned about the rights of women who can.  The same has to be said for my female anti-choice'counterparts, it seems to me.

                Just as I remained concerned about the lives of children and the quality of the world we leave to them even though I will never have another child.

                One doesn't have to be a parent to be concerned with children's issues.  Similarly, one doesn't have to have a fertile uterus to be concerned with reproductive rights.  It's simply that those of us who are less personally impacted don't get to dictate for those that are directly impacted.

                The issues ARE for all of us, but the power to which the whole of the polity should give to the various voices should be proportionate to the impact and direct experience of those affected.  

                Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

                by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:51:54 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Why would they think they could have (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            G2geek, drmah

            an abortion if they needed one?  After all, with Roe gone then government attempts to prevent abortion fall back to the "reasonable basis" standard and considering how the 4th amendment has been gutted that isn't much.  How about things like pregnancy testing hardware in the sewer lines and mandatory pregnancy testing while going through customs?  Not to mention the possibility of setting up pregnancy testing roadblocks on major roads leading into states where abortion is still legal (assuming the ruling overturning Roe does not also state that abortion is an Unconstitutional infringement on the rights of the fetus).

            You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

            by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:32:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  interesting scenarios: (2+ / 0-)

              Preg-testing roadblocks between states would be thrown out immediately as an impediment to commerce and freedom of travel.

              However, preg-testing at customs is very interesting.  The tricky part would be to find a way to test women as they left the US, to compare the result when they came back in.  You can smuggle something out of a country pretty easily, it's the smuggling into a country that's difficult.  

              As for sewers, keyword search "smart toilets."  Seriously.

              "Minus two votes for the Republican" equals "plus one vote for the Democrat." Arithmetic doesn't care about their feelings either!

              by G2geek on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:50:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, with todays technology such as (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                the ability to see what people are doing through walls (now it can be done passively as long as there is any kind of radio transmitter such as wifi or even a cordless phone in the building), smart meters that can function as keyloggers (from BlackHat 2009), laser microphones, and similar technology soon to include smart toilets how exactly do they think they would get away with going to another state/country to get an abortion once Rmoney gets enough justices on the supreme court to overturn Roe and finish gutting the 5th amendment?

                You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:04:42 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  which is why I don't have wireless anything. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Throw The Bums Out

                  I get all my surveillance for my taxpayer's dollar, so why pay more?;-)

                  Seriously though:  I don't have any wireless devices in my home infrastructure, I paid the fee to revert to an old-school power meter, I don't have a cellphone or Facebook account, and I don't use Google.  

                  I'm hardly as concerned with government or military snooping as I am with private-sector surveillance and possible criminal hacking.  Unless, if by some chance (or hacked voting machines), Romney gets in.

                  The application depicted in the linked article, where police can figure out where a hostage-taker is located in a building, is all fine & well, and no sane person would object to it being used that way in emergencies to save lives.  

                  But clearly this has more insidious potentials as a generic method of surveillance, for which it should require a warrant signed by a judge.  Really:  as anyone who reads my comments a lot around here knows, I'm seriously hawkish on national defense and on law enforcement, but also ferocious about privacy rights.  There's no good reason to not have the check-and-balance of a judge signing off on a warrant for any form of electronic surveillance.  

                  "Minus two votes for the Republican" equals "plus one vote for the Democrat." Arithmetic doesn't care about their feelings either!

                  by G2geek on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 03:38:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Just replace "hostage taker" with "suspected (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    homosexual" and you can see just where it can go.  As for not having any wireless devices, do you have an air conditioner or refrigerator?  How about an old style (tube type as opposed to compact) fluorescent light?  Because I bet old style fluorescent ballasts and (poorly shielded) electric motors would put out enough RF to count as "wireless devices" for the purposes of such surveillance technology.  Besides if those wifi radars and powerline keyloggers are now available to anyone who can follow a schematic diagram, how long do you think it will be before the more fancy stuff like being able to remotely view what's on your tv/monitor (yes, even flat screens) becomes practical for widespread use?

                    As for requiring a court order, while that is probably true today what do you think would happen once the extremist Republicans (through Romney) get a few more justices on the supreme court?  Exactly, "unreasonable search and seizure" would be reinterpreted to not require a warrant for any kind of technological surveillance (including the active kind like laser microphones) that does not involve officers physically being on private property.

                    You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                    by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 04:08:45 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I built my own refrigeration system. (0+ / 0-)

                      All oldschool mechanical components, with separate digital thermostats for fridge and freezer.  Reduced my yearly power consumption by 1,000 KWH that way.  No computer components, no network connections.

                      But what's this, do modern fridges come with remote controls?  I'd drop dead before I had something like that in my house.

                      Oldschool fluorescents: nope.  

                      But in general, you're probably right that any RF emissions anywhere can be used for reflective monitoring in that way.  At that point the best defense is shielding everything, and I know how to do that as well.  

                      Remotely viewing what's on your TV or computer screen: already possible, NSA had a classified term for that some time ago, something related to TEMPEST, and then they ran around securing all the gov devices that could leak classified info that way.

                      "Suspected homosexuals" would require reversing two or three standing SC cases: not going to happen, or if it does, we're already well past the point of Civil War II by that time.

                      But the thing is, this is not where the threat is.  Complex electronics that have to be physically targeted, are too labor intensive to be of much interest for broad-spectrum abuses.

                      The real threat is in places such as Google and Facebook.

                      For example employers using Facebook to spy on their employees' private lives: that's going on right now.   Google automatic transcription of phone calls: that's going on right now with Google Voice, starting with voicemail messages and contextual ads in response to phone conversations.

                      A guy calls up their local AA group and says "I think I'm an alcoholic, where can I find a meeting?" and then gets ads on their news page for "Serve Seagrams after your next business meeting!"  That kind of thing.  

                      The goal of all of it is to thwart free will at every turn, and extract money (converted energy, or in Marxist language, "surplus value") from humans at every opportunity.  Human husbandry.

                      "Minus two votes for the Republican" equals "plus one vote for the Democrat." Arithmetic doesn't care about their feelings either!

                      by G2geek on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 04:27:47 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  The point is that NSA level spy technology like (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:

                        remotely viewing what is on your TV/monitor is becoming easier and easier to do.  Let's put it this way, that kind of keylogging through power lines costs about $500 for a one-off device built mostly from discrete components.  With mass production, how much per meter do you think it would take to add a keylogger to every power meter by say, 2024?  Or what happens when Google starts adding reflective monitoring to their street view vans because it can be added at a cost of only $100 per van?  Or when anyone can import (from China/Hong Kong) a handheld reflective monitoring device for less than the cost of a DSLR camera from DealExtreme or such?

                        Also, I don't think it is possible to shield everything to the amount required to prevent such reflective monitoring.  You would have to heavily shield every light switch, every millimeter of electrical wire, and so on.

                        Oh, and the unclassified term for that remote tv/monitor stuff is "Van Eck monitoring/phreaking".  Who knows (or cares) what the NSA calls it.

                        You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                        by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 04:40:29 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  none the less, far less of a threat than... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Throw The Bums Out

                          .... Google and Facebook and "smart" phones and other "smart" devices.

                          As for Google's spymobiles, those should be treated in the same manner as getaway cars from bank robberies.  One of these days I'm going to figure out a way to render them harmless at a distance.  

                          Bottom line is, we need a comprehensive privacy amendment to the Constitution.  

                          And even the debate would be worth having, because it would open a lot of peoples' eyes.

                          "Minus two votes for the Republican" equals "plus one vote for the Democrat." Arithmetic doesn't care about their feelings either!

                          by G2geek on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 05:07:05 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

        •  something happens in your mindset when... (0+ / 0-)

          you become reasonably wealthy.  you develop a sudden desire to cling to as much of your money as possible, even though some could never spend it all in their lifetime.  the Log Cabin Republican's are no different.  it's the only explanation i can come up with for their existence.

          I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

          by blue drop on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:34:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Because the women who who are anti-choice (21+ / 0-)

      are devoutly and intensely anti-choice, so they are true believers.  They think for themselves just fine, they simply don't want other women who think and feel differently from them to have a say.

      Anti-choice men aren't as personally connected no matter how vehemently their beliefs about abortion (which are secondary to their beliefs about the gender order), because they tend to project their own gendered world view outward and just miss the reality forest for the fundamentalist forest.

      Anti-choice women are a completely different crowd, they are adamantly anti-choice, not simply caught up in the patriarchal world view of the 16th century (as their men are).  These women believe themselves to be modern women expressing their own firmly held beliefs about abortion. (And they can't really fathom that other women would hold differerent views without simply being selfish.)

      Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

      by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:57:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And yet, do they even begin to understand the... (9+ / 0-)

        ramifications of how barbaric these beliefs can be?  

        They obviously don't understand that when deliberate rape is carried out strategically on a massive scale it can actually be used as a...

        "...method of ethnic cleansing..."
        Republican simplistic black and white thinking, and their insistence on "no exceptions to the rules" can lead to their endorsing some evil and barbaric things--yet they are too stupid, and the media are too oblivious to make them face up to the scale of the real suffering they endorse.
        •  Everything you are talking about... (5+ / 0-)

 called "moral relativism" in their circles.

          I'm not qualified to speak for all of them, but am taking this from the conversations I've had with my sister who is staunchly anti-choice for what she calls "religious/moral reasons".

          My observations are based on this case.

          Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

          by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:40:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maybe they should be grilled on the fact... (5+ / 0-)

            that what they are trying to decide for others on a small scale has been deliberately and barbarically used against women, and entire populations on a large scale.  

            They claim to be "pro-life" but they must be forced to acknowledge that with that stand, they have started to acknowledge that they are also endorsing rape.  They need to be faced with the ugly big picture of just what it is they are endorsing.  

            They've been controlling the narrative of "pro-life" far too long.  They've been pretending to be on the high road of morality, but now when they begin to excuse rape as a method of reproduction, one that has to be "accepted"--people need to hold their feet to the fire on it, IMHO.

            •  grilling them on anything (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              shaharazade, Merry Light

              is pointless.  This is a strongly emotional issue not a rational one. There's very little thinking involved at all.

              Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

              by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:02:04 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The point isn't to convince them. The point is... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                G2geek, a gilas girl

                if people in the media would ask the Mordochs, the Aikens, the Romneys, etc some follow-up questions, their answers would clarify for viewers/ readers exactly how hypocritical, how shallow, and/or how dangerous these extremists are.  

                After Mourdoch, or Aiken, (or other generic tea party fundamentalist politicians) make remarks about pregnancies resulting from rape being "God's Will" or "Gifts", some follow-up questions could be:  

                Q:  So, Senator/ Rep. Fundamentalist, given your views on rape, do you endorse the:

                "...estimated 200,000 women raped during the battle for Bangladeshi independence..."

                Because, you know, there were certainly many children born of these forcible strategic rapes, after all--that was the point, in fact:

                The same tactic was used in a "very strategic attack" by state-backed Pakistani troops during the fight for Bangladesh's independence in 1971, Ms Sahgal said.

                "They were saying 'we will make you breed Punjabi children'," she said, with the aim of weakening the integrity of the opposing ethnic group....

                 "In Bosnia systematic rape was used as part of the strategy of ethnic cleansing," it said.

                "Women were raped so they could give birth to a Serbian baby..."  

                Q:  So, again Senator/ Rep. Extremist Fundamentalist, are you endorsing forcible rape for the purpose of deliberately impregnating women of opposing political or ethnic groups for the purpose of "ethnic cleansing"?  

                Let the public hear their answers.  They might not change their own minds, but many people might just be interested in, and enlightened by hearing their answers.

                •  You've taken the discussion beyond my comment now (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Merry Light

                  the media will never grill my sister...I was just trying to answer the question someone was asking about the mindset of anti-choice women.

                  I'll be quiet now.

                  Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

                  by a gilas girl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:38:56 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I think the women who are staunch GOP (0+ / 0-)

                    are 1) unhappy. I see so many of them (we've got a lot, their headquarters are right up the street) with a very grumpy, decidedly uncheerful look. They like to stick their nose into other's business, unasked. They have strong opinions that aren't swayed by facts.  2) I'll bet a lot of them (especially the older women and maybe the younger ones) didn't study too hard and/or saw school as an opportunity to find a husband.  

                    These women, in my mind, didn't learn critical thinking and don't know how, let alone want to. I don't know, gilas girl, if this is your sister, but I also think they don't understand or want to think about the bigger picture such as what happens when there's a war and women are counted as "spoils".  

                    If the media talked to them, they may pull a "Palin" just because they aren't capable of deep and critical thinking.  I'm fortunately not related in my immediate family to women like that, but I know some and it scares me! My heart goes out to you to have to deal with that within your family!

                    -6.50/-5.23 "Don't find fault, find a remedy." - Henry Ford

                    by Merry Light on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 07:59:34 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  In all honesty (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              jtanneru, G2geek, tacet

              This "pro life" thing really merits serious psychological investigation.  Prior to the most recent 1-2 generations in U.S. history, there has never been such intensely passionate focus on abortion as an issue.  

              Abortion is not mentioned in the Bible.  Most scholars believe that, historically, both Jews and early Christians believed that the soul entered the body with a baby's first breath.  Alternatively, "quickening," the moment when a woman first feels the fetus move, was demarcated by some cultures as the moment when you had "life" or a soul-inhabited baby.  The notion of "ensoulment" at the moment of egg-meets-sperm is an entirely new concept.  In fact, it seems to be entirely the product of sufficient technology to even understand (minimally) the process of conception and gestation.

              IMO, this was all triggered by the 1960s work of Swedish photographer Lennart Nilsson, who published "A Child is Born," a famous collection of images of embryos and fetuses at various stages of development.  Ironically, virtually all of his "subjects" were aborted, and he staged them in poses and with remnants of the amniotic sac and placenta (the famous pic of the fetus with its thumb in its mouth is him). It's nothing that's inherent to the Bible or the religious traditions of Christianity.

              I also think that part of this is the collision between technological advances re: imagery of early pregnancy, and dramatically reduced infant and child mortality rates, which led people to invest more in the notion of children and babies (at a time when half or more of the children in a family would die before reaching adulthood, it was common to recycle family names for children when siblings had died, there was far less emotional attachment/investment in infants because of the awareness of mortality).

              Thought is only a flash in the middle of a long night, but the flash that means everything - Henri Poincaré

              by milton333 on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:12:43 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  very interesting; good points. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                My inclination is to believe that the obsession with blastocysts is part of the reaction against "Teh 1960s," sexual liberation, and so on.  

                But there's also an instinct-level thing going on here, which is that some humans are hard-wired for "R-selection" reproductive strategy (have lots of offspring, invest relatively little effort in raising each one) and others are hard-wired for "K-selection" reproductive strategy (have few offspring, invest a lot of effort in raising each one).  IMHO, R/K-selection theory is the key to the kingdom of a bunch of Republican policies.

                "Minus two votes for the Republican" equals "plus one vote for the Democrat." Arithmetic doesn't care about their feelings either!

                by G2geek on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:02:23 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  VERY interesting point: abortion, mass rape and... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ... "ethnic cleansing."   That question should be put to all the "rape fantasy Republicans," and get them on video answering it (or ducking it).  

          "Minus two votes for the Republican" equals "plus one vote for the Democrat." Arithmetic doesn't care about their feelings either!

          by G2geek on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:54:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  They believe they are "better" than everyone else (0+ / 0-)

        has been my experience. Truly miserable Devolved humans usually as well.

        WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

        by IARXPHD on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:52:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Please attend Your Local RW Megachurch Sunday. (12+ / 0-)

      The sex control talk can't be handed out from the thinktank talking point generator; if it were the big pundits would be promoting it.

      This crap comes on Sunday and these goons believe every word. Protestant as well as Catholic.

      Image Hosted by

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:58:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I said back in 2008 (11+ / 0-)

      when Obama was elected, that the reason for the GOP freakout was that they simply did not see it coming. They were safely inside their bubble, and so many non-whites having a say in an election was a genuine shock to them. That's why to this day they continue to think Obama stole it. And they'll no doubt think it this year as well.

      Once again, Republicans show there is no fact that they feel the need to learn. ~ Fordmandalay

      by MeMeMeMeMe on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:03:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was thinking the "Obama stole it" theme was (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shaharazade, G2geek

        just their twisting of the "GDub stole it" refrain from our side back in that era. Granted, it would take a profound lack of awareness to not carry the context with the use of the phrase, but look at who we're talkin' about here.

        I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

        by Gentle Giant on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:55:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Well, I'd clarify that a bit. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Vatexia, G2geek

        They saw it coming. They think we (and much of America) thought Barack Obama was some sort of messiah, that we were completely deluded.

        So they truly despise us for being so stupid, and him for being a snake oil salesman.

        I have  a Republican  friend who voted for President Obama. The reason at the time was that Palin being with a breath or two of the  presidency was an absurd and terrifying idea.

        Now? All I hear is that I (yes, me, little fuzzy blue blue grover) somehow brainwashed them into voting for Obama. And he has ruined the world! Ruined it!

        So the messiah failed to deliver on saving the world.

        And they truly hate us for that.

        Of course who used the messiah term? Hannity and his ilk.

        Within that segment of the population, he never stood a chance. He was set up to fail.

        © grover

        So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

        by grover on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:04:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My totally ignorant, (0+ / 0-)

          RW conservative daughter in law asked me after the election in 09 if I thought Obama was the anti-Christ? Neither she or my son are religious, so that really threw me. I think her fiends and her side of the family seriously believe this type of insanity. It is normal to them to ask such a bizarre question. Last Christmas she asked with a straight face 'So how about that Michele Bachman, do you think she will run for higher office like Hillary and Sarah P did?

          They live in a whole other reality that they feel is mainstream, decent and the American way.. She knows I'm a liberal Democrat but in her world view and culture RW maniacs are normal and it's the liberals are dangerous extremists.  Many RWer's do live in a bubble even if they are not religious fundies.  

          Funny part is that my son who's a 'conservative' supported Obama as he thought he was liberal and said maybe it's time for you liberals to have control and fix this mess. He thought the Bushies went to far. This was in 08. He hates Romney but he now is back to calling Democrat's 'slimy and corrupt'. We agreed to not talk politics any more and I hardly see them.  

          He got a vasectomy last year as his wife just loves having babies and once they get a little older she wants a new one. She's like the character Dot in Raising Arizona. She is also anti abortion but not  religious. Sher just can't understand anyone outside her culture and world. She's also gullible and fearful and gets all freaked out about what ever danger and fear the TV and Fox pumps out.  


    •  The women that buy into this crap (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      maryabein, confitesprit, sockpuppet

      are perhaps analogous to the Log Cabin Republicans. Gleeful participants in their own oppression.

      Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

      by Dale on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:04:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  After watching one of my own sisters, (7+ / 0-)

      I think I understand more than I did previously how it is that women buy into this crap.  It's (IMHO) a combination of being under the control of their husbands and at the same time being both insecure in the value of their own ideas/opinions while at the same time trying to keep peace in the family by not going against a selfish, autocratic, controlling husband.  It's really a sick, sick phenomenon to watch play out on a daily basis and it's definitely not a healthy relationship.  My sister is so screwed up due to trying for years to reconcile within herself to becoming a witless automaton and giving up her own autonomy and independence of thought.  But at the root of it all is utter and absolute control by an insecure, ignorant, loud-mouth husband.

      We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. Louis D. Brandeis

      by 3goldens on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:34:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, I can think of one very good reason (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      that there are still lots of women who vote GOP.   It's the same reason that lots of poor or working-class people vote GOP against their own economic self-interest.  

      I'm going to paraphrase a completely spot-on assessment made a while back which explained why non-wealthy white people voted GOP against their own economic interests.  It's the same psychology at work with white heterosexual Christian American women who vote GOP.

      You see, if you're a heterosexual white Christian American female, you basically have one of two choices:

      (1) You can enjoy the same rights and equality as any male, but in return, gays, minorities and non-Christians also get to enjoy the same rights and equality as you do.

      (2) You're forced to cede your sex life and control over your body to male dominance, but at the same time, since you're a heterosexual white Christian American, you get to enjoy a higher place on the totem pole than gays, minorities and non-Christians.  

      Republican women are the ones who choose option #2.  For them, giving up control of their bodies and sex lives isn't too high a price to pay for the privilege of convincing themselves that they're Real Americans(tm) while all those dirty minorities, queers, Moslems and liberals aren't.

    •  It's the 3 I's Indoctrinate, Isolate, Intimidate (0+ / 0-)

      It starts when they are just children and highly impressionable and continues through adolescence and into young adulthood by suppressing what they read, watch, where they go and what they do. It's not unlike how the Taliban control their women. In my opinion, it shows a deep hatred of women and a great fear of them. If you want to control a group or a society, you start by controlling the women. Most extreme religious society's view women as property, objects that can be bartered with and used like slave labor. They see women as lesser beings and in such they are treated like cattle.

      The extreme religious use the 3 I's ; Indoctrination, Isolation and Intimidation. Most of these women have been denied access to any real form of education, just have a gander at the number of home schools that are religious based here in the US. They do this so their children will not be exposed to differing views, ideas and facts like; evolution, climate change, human sexuality, psychology and the many other sciences that would threaten their belief systems and world view.

      These women never get the opportunity to be exposed to anything different from cradle to grave. Their community is the church where they are indoctrinated, many are schooled at home where they are isolated, and if they show even the smallest amount of curiosity or question authority, they are intimidated, punished and shunned severely. They are made dependent and ignorant, taught to hate themselves and especially to hate anyone or anything that differs from their faith based beliefs. It's a herculean effort in cognitive dissonance and it's a shrinking population. I think that is why we are seeing this extinction explosion. Which is a psychological term for when a subject (person or animal) performs an action that no longer gives the desired reward/response and the subject, in desperation preforms the action over and over with escalating desperation until the action or behavior stops or becomes extinct. We are witnessing an extinction explosion now with the extreme religious right. It's just not a sustainable way to live as our population grows and changes and technology has put so much information at our fingertips.

      "Today we say all art is political. But I'd say all art has to do with ethics. Which after all really comes to the same thing. It's a matter of attitudes." ~Ingmar Bergman

      by Digital Auteur on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 03:24:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Now *THERE* is an apology tour that should (12+ / 0-)

    happen. Every Republican asshat should be forced to tour the nation and offer apologies to the women, minorities, and poor people they've repeatedly slandered and worked so hard to harm. Then they should all be drummed out of public office and forced to work in non-profits helping those they've harmed for so many years.

    Every time Romney and Republicans mention Benghazi it proves they are the sort of opportunists that would mine for gold in a graveyard.

    by ontheleftcoast on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:45:18 AM PDT

  •  Look some people are just BETTER than others... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, sockpuppet, KateCrashes, sfbob

    Oh sorry, for some reason they couch that one in dog whistles.  

    Dunno why, since they have no problem believing it.

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:46:42 AM PDT

  •  No apologies needed here (11+ / 0-)

    I wouldn't accept his apology because it would not be sincere.  Men like Mourdock, and women who love them are fu_king pathetic IMO. Since this is America they are entitled to their opinion, and I am entitled to mine.

    Don’t argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.—Greg King

    by Pinto Pony on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:47:30 AM PDT

  •  are their polls show that rape is a winning issue (12+ / 0-)

    for them?
    has America said in a poll it is a good idea to lessen rape laws or forced pregnancy is a good family value?
    do the republicans ask rape questions in their internal polling?
    I really doubt any of the above

    the idea that they really believe this seems to be the most plausible reason. and it really is troubling all by itself.
    the repubs are dangerous nuts.

    "With malice toward none, with charity for all..." -Abraham Lincoln not a modern republican

    by live1 on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:48:03 AM PDT

  •  if anyone is offended (18+ / 0-)

    he is sorry that they're overly-sensitive.

    one crazy republican can be an aberration. a couple can be a political problem. having a new one appear every week becomes more than a pattern. it becomes a defining feature.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:48:20 AM PDT

  •  The simple answer is... (6+ / 0-)

    ... because he wants to get elected...

    and for that he needs the votes of decent, respectful and respectable people ad you can't get those votes if you are that ignorant of a thoughtless asshole...

    ... which therefore requires that he apologize for being honest and open about his ignorant assholery.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:50:19 AM PDT

    •  Well, if that is indeed the case in Indiana - (5+ / 0-)

      which is debatable - then Muordock still has an apology to deliver because what he said yesterday was not an apology.  It was a, "You misunderstood me and twisted my words" accusation, not an apology.

      •  Well............ (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Both words start with "a".........

        And they both have 4 syllables.............

        That's a start..................  {grin}

        As of 02/22/2012 in Washington State pharmacists can exercise their "religious freedom" by denying women access to Plan B because the judge thinks there aren't any bigots in this state.

        by FlamingoGrrl on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:12:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly, republicans won't apologize for their.. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ..wrongs unless it hits then the only way that matters to them, cetainly not for being assholes.

      The MSM keeps propping up this - "Romney's got the momentum" BS, but that is gone now (it has been for longer than has been reported)
      Nate Silver has the numbers 538:

      The question, rather, is whether Mr. Romney is gaining ground relative to the post-Denver polls — or if, as Wednesday’s polls seemed to imply, the race instead may have ticked back slightly toward Mr. Obama.
      President Obama is back up @ 71% to 29% chance of winning - (Colorado has turned from pink to light blue)

      We'll see how many more republicans show "contrition" as they try to distance themselves from the fanatics like Mourdock, Akin, and Rick Berg types.

  •  Fox Snooze should get major credit (14+ / 0-)

    for putting so many conservatives to into a dream state.

    If cats could blog, they wouldn't

    by crystal eyes on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:50:46 AM PDT

    •  And, for creating a bubble which could ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dkosdan, crystal eyes

      (hopefully) lose them a lot of seats, not to mention, not being able to get rid of the black guy in the White House... and hopefully, that's just for starters.  If Fox is really successful, then the next 2 elections should be even better (for Dems, and the country) as we get rid of Governors such as mine (pRick Scott) ...

  •  I fail to see why Murdock's comments (10+ / 0-)

    about rape are any less abominable than Jerry Sandusky's denials.

    Murdock would legally force a young girl impregnated by her father to have a child.

    I really don't see how Murdock isn't implicitly condoning child abuse.

    Have you googled Romney today?

    by fou on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:50:51 AM PDT

  •  The GOP is a party that wishes to revitalize (9+ / 0-)

    a world we liberals have destroyed or are destroying for the better.

    We liberals seek equal rights for women, equal rights for minorities, demand equal rights for LGBT people, demand greater economic equality for the poor, launched the war on poverty, protect the environment, etc.

    All of these reforms hurt the constituency and base of the GOP at its core. It hurt businesses, which wish to profit off of labor-exploitation or wish to damage the environment for the sake of making profit.

    It hurt white-supremacists, who believe they are superior people, simply because of the accident of their birth.

    It hurt religious-conservatives, who believe God ordered women to submit to men and that homosexuality is a grave sin.

    Not surprisingly these entities overwhelmingly vote Republican. And they vote Republican because they wish to return to that world.

    •  I wonder if this sudden support for (5+ / 0-)

      rape among Republican politicians is related to their anxiety over the country's changing demographics.

      I don't think they much care if non-white women have abortions, but I think they're keen on ensuring that white women don't have the option.  


      Even if the baby is by her dad.


      That is so profoundly offensive that words fail.

      Have you googled Romney today?

      by fou on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:55:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  These Idiots Always Apologize That We Heard Wrong. (8+ / 0-)

    "I in no way said what I said, and to suggest that I said what I said impugnes your integrity and suggests that you don't love our great nation." Assholes can't cover up the insanity, it always leaks out.

    All of these smug little jerks look alike to me – from Ralph Reed to Eric Cantor to Jeb Hensarling to Rand Paul and now to Ryan, they all look like overgrown kids who got nipple-twisted in the halls in high school..Matt Taibbi.

    by Ky DEM on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:51:15 AM PDT

  •  He's only apologizing (6+ / 0-)

    for vocalizing his true beliefs at a venue where there were too many unsuspecting/rational people listening.

    He should know these kinds of words must only be spoken in the company of those who "believe".

    •  This is why I now view the GOP as a cult (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      edwardssl, rlharry, tacet, drmah

      Their key beliefs can only be spoken among believers.  Non-believers are the enemy.  And anything done to thwart the enemy is good, even if it seems to be ethically or legally wrong according to the rules that non-believers recognize.

      "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

      by KateCrashes on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:01:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  It one of those things they want left unsaid (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, 3goldens, KateCrashes

    Basically listening to Morning Schmoe today, he basically only called him out for saying it OUT LOUD.  We all know what they want to do when they regain control of the government.  Now after years of realizing the party was only providing lip service for their votes (6 years in control of the WH and both houses from 2001-2007) and abortion was still legal, they decided they needed to run their own candidates, who fortunately for us, can't keep their mouth shut.

    "There is no barrier of people's acceptance. The only barrier is the media. Remember what people cannot see or hear, they cannot think about." - liner notes of Soft Cell's 'The Art of Falling Apart'.

    by dugjxn on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:52:05 AM PDT

  •  Congratulations (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, Bob Friend

    finally an honest Republican.....

  •  We need a war on Fundamentalism (8+ / 0-)

    Coming from any faith.

    They are all the enemies of the modern, tolerant, multicultural world.

    "Work for something because it is good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed." -- Vaclav Havel

    by greendem on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:53:26 AM PDT

    •  Correct, this may be a war on women but it is (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      greendem, tardis10, drmah

      channelled through their fundamentalistic believe system that is largely a throw back to witch hunts. It seems to me that you are only getting this fundamentalism/anti-pro-choise coming through the Southern Baptists, megachurchs, and some Catholics like Ryan and Santorum. It just so happens that they are largely Republicans. I don't see any leaders from the Lutherns, Methodists, Episcopal, etc. churches beating the drums.

      "There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats ..." - Kenneth Grahame -

      by RonK on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:28:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Mainline Churches (0+ / 0-)

        are fine.

        They are mostly ecumenical and work for social justice.

        They are part of the solution.

        "Work for something because it is good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed." -- Vaclav Havel

        by greendem on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:32:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  When romney loses the election, the GOP (10+ / 0-)

    will have to take a step back and do some soul-searching. If they continue to let the right-wing of their party dominate the agenda  with their anti-science, anti-gay, anti-poor and middle class, anti-woman, anti-brown people platform, they may never win another election. The changing demographics will consume them.

    I look for the next batch of GOP hopefuls in 2016 to come out and try to moderate their message.

    "Democrats have the heart to care."

    by jeepdad on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:53:55 AM PDT

  •  about f*&%ing time (5+ / 0-)

    that one of their pet wedge issues turns into the mote in their own eye.

    agree w/ assessment here. no need for outraged insistence that mourdock (and supporters) apologize. like the dog food that makes its own gravy w/ water added, this cro-magnon social policy provides its own outrage.

    just need to keep pointing out: this is what they believe. this is how the christian far right view women:  not deserving of personal autonomy, and as mere pez dispensers for the pre-born.

    keep your eyes on the sky. put a dollar in the kitty. don't the moon look pretty. --becker&fagen

    by homo neurotic on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:58:22 AM PDT

  •  The Republican Party seems to be (7+ / 0-)

    embracing rape. But why should that come as a surprise.

    After all, lately we've seen Republicans call for an end to child labor laws, and minimum wage laws.

    Women, children, and workers exist to be used and discarded or outsourced as necessary.

    Nothing they say or do should surprise us.

    WE NEVER FORGET Our Labor Martyrs: a project to honor the men, women and children who lost their lives in Freedom's Cause. For Oct: Miners are cheaper than props.

    by JayRaye on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 11:58:50 AM PDT

  •  More pointed - it's a Plank in the GOP Platform (11+ / 0-)

    These folks can run from Mr. Mourdock and denounce his ineloquent remark, but they certainly agree with it.

    Mr. Mourdock merely mimicked the GOP party platform that calls for a 'Personhood' Amendment.

    It's not just a few Republicans, it's their Party Platform to outlaw all abortions (since a fetus would have Constitutional rights).

    A vote for any Republican is a vote that believes:

    Rape (that begets children) is Gods will.

    Rape is Gods will.


    •  And by logical deduction, A vote for any (0+ / 0-)

      Republican is a vote to make rape legal.

      You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

      by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:35:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  letters should go to the editor's of our... (0+ / 0-)

      respective local papers on this topic.  something along the lines that the entire Republican party (not just the more loud-mouthed ones) want to force my daughter/granddaughter to have a rapist's baby.

      i heard a talk show host sort of joking and serious about whether or not the rapist would get visitation rights to the baby.  i told that to my partner and he said that there are 31 states that allow rapists to sue for parental rights.  if that's true----unFREAKINbelievable!  this country truly is screwed up.

      I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

      by blue drop on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:50:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  My question was (7+ / 0-)

    what is he apologizing for since this is his belief!!? Apology my cat's furry butt. It's nothing but "Listen ladies, I'm sorry I said it out loud, but, yeah, rape babies rock."

    Screw these GOP/TP men. I'm sick of them. In fact I'm sick of any man thinking he has power of my reproductive system and health.

    Keep your cynicism off my optimism, thanks

    by Its any one guess on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:00:47 PM PDT

    •  Yep, I've never quite understood the idea (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Its any one guess

      Of "calling for an apology" in politics.

      My parents used to make us apologize until we were about 7.

      Then, they realized we were old enough to either be remorseful on our own, or we were not. . If not, we were  grounded, often for extended periods. No tv, no phone, no visitors.

       In sum, I got grounded well into my 40's.

      I think I'm due to be release from my bedroom in a few weeks. These people don't mess around.


      We should lock up poorly behaving Congressional representatives in their bedrooms: no tv (or tv cameras), phones, computers, or visitors.  They may not become any more remorseful, but they won't do any harm there either.

      © grover

      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:45:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The good part.. (6+ / 0-) when the real world recoils at their insane views, they then offer public apologies which, in turn, causes their crazy followers to abandon them.

    That's why Romney is tanking in the battleground states after the 3rd debate...he started agreeing with Obama (the highest of wingnut sins) which pissed off the Republican zealots, which means they are now going to stay at home on election day.

    And I get it:  If Obama spent 90 minutes agreeing with Romney, there is no way in hell I would vote for Obama.

    "You just gotta keep on livin man! L-I-V-I-N!" - Wooderson

    by wyvern on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:00:48 PM PDT

  •  Aging and dying off (5+ / 0-)

    Seems to me that I have been waiting all my life for the right wing nutcases to age and die off - so exactly when will this happen? At this rate it will be me that age and die off before all these crazy old wingbats take off too.  This does not seem a good plan to turn the country progressive.

    Keep constant watch on your mind. - Dalai Lama

    by redstella on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:03:50 PM PDT

    •  same here (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KateCrashes, dkosdan

      i remember thinking that with reagan. and here we are over thirty years gone.

      "With malice toward none, with charity for all..." -Abraham Lincoln not a modern republican

      by live1 on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:18:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Me too! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I have most of my high school graduating class (1982) hidden from my FB Newsfeed, or unfriended, because of these kinds of religious extremist, sexist, or even racist views.  Do I have to make it to 100 to have a few minutes uninterrupted by fearing and fighting this hateful garbage?

      When do enough people get into reality in this country to give a massive STFU to these shit-heads?

      Manufacturing outrage; the only manufacturing jobs Republicans won't outsource.

      by get the red out on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:28:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So, here we are with less than two weeks (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jerry056, Cassandra Waites, drmah

    until the election and we are spending another two or three  precious days talking about everyone's favorite topic:  Rape.  Not the economy.  Not the deficit.  Not the jobs report.  We're talking about rape AND how out of touch and outrageous the republican positions are AND exactly which republican candidates adhere to them.  


    Tick tock, republicans.  Tick tock.    

    Metaphors be with you.

    by koosah on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:07:07 PM PDT

  •  If a recently formed zygote is a "human being" (5+ / 0-)

    ..then any abortion is murder. It's in the Republican platform.

    Own it, Republicans. Run with it.

    Candy-asses. What are you afraid of?


    Perhaps one day the Fourth Estate will take their jobs seriously. Or not..

    by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:07:14 PM PDT

    •  Mayor Noun-Verb 9/11 (1+ / 0-)

      Was on Matthews' show this week tapdancing like  crazy trying to disawow that little tidbit without actually doing so.

      It was one of the best weaselly non-answer performances I've ever seen. And totally transparent.

      © grover

      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:51:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Im in europe right now (6+ / 0-)

    im so embarassed to be an America.  Particularly in countries where people lived under oppression and are now free.  Why is this race even close?

  •  ... and worse (5+ / 0-)
    Why should Mourdock apologize for saying what they all believe?
    Once in a while guys get to hear behind the crazy screen because, like racist Euros, some of the psychos think everyone believes as they do, so they let fly right out loud.

    I tend to avoid the word "terrifying" when I'm talking about politics, but that's what they are.

  •  I just RT'd something from Amanda Marcotte: (17+ / 0-)
    they should just all come out and say it already: They don't really think of rape like it's a real crime.
    truer words were never said, these guys believe they have a right to use anything they want to, including women's bodies
  •  I just spoke to a friend with two daughters (5+ / 0-)

    in their 20's. He said they don't connect these outrageous statements about abortion and contraception with their own lives. These are very bright, well educated young women! They'll vote for PBO, if they vote, but

    DESPAIRING . . .

    Okay, the Government says you MUST abort your child. NOW do you get it?

    by Catskill Julie on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:16:23 PM PDT

  •  Not true: most believe pregnancy is punishment (0+ / 0-)

    and that those who play must pay either with a child or at least the state making it tough on you.

    That is why the vast number of pro lifers want a rape exception: a raped girl needn't be punished any more.

    Only a few would endorse life over a rape victim.

    Mourdock's problem, in sum, is as much with his base as it is with anyone else.

    "Binder? I just met her!"

    by Inland on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:17:58 PM PDT

  •  WATB (4+ / 0-)
    Today has not been a fun day,” a teary-eyed Mourdock told a private dinner meeting of the Hamilton County Republican Party. “Professionally, emotionally, it’s been one of the toughest days of my life quite frankly.”
    Toughest day of his life. How'd he like to swap one tough day for 10 tough months with any woman who's had to carry a rapist's baby to term?
  •  But we don't live in a theocracy (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    toys, ThirtyFiveUp, RonK

    What Mourdock and other neanderthals are saying about women's repo health would be less controversial if our laws were dictated by fundamentalist Christian belief. But they're not supposed to be, and that's why his comments are outrageous. Another point: if he believes in God's will in this way, then Obama was meant to be President!

    •  That's why... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rlharry, drmah
      Another point: if he believes in God's will in this way, then Obama was meant to be President!
      .....religion and religious beliefs should have no place in a democracy.

      It's the mother of all slippery slopes.

      You can use "god" to justify anything, or nothing, depending on your point of view.

      "It's god's will for this, but not for that."

      And when you back these shitheads like Mourdock up against the wall, what can you really say, because they've got "god" on their side.

      And who's going to argue with god?

      "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

      by jkay on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:56:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We weren't living in a theocracy (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      when the laws lined up a lot more with traditional Christian belief than they do now, either.  That's not what a theocracy means.  You could have laws that almost completely reflected Christian belief without it being a theocracy.

  •  GOP: winning the class war but losing culture wars (0+ / 0-)

    I think that these divergent trends are at the core of the present political reality.

    The GOP has managed to stack the deck in favor of the 1% by passing laws that favor the wealthy, and the average Joes and Jills of America have let them get away with it.

    However, they have been steadily losing the culture wars. On a whole range of issues, the nation has been growing steadily more progressive, and the most culturally conservative citizens are aging out and dying off.

    In some ways, losing the culture war has played to the GOP's political advantage, since they can get angry cultural conservatives to vote against their own economic interests. But time may be running out on this strategy, and it's risks become obvious when one of their own really steps in it with an egregious remark like Mourdock's.

  •  Mourdock stupidly violates the code of RW silence (0+ / 0-)
    “A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished”

    yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:44:32 PM PDT

  •  All this faux outrage at Murdoch being (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryabein, pattym922

    "misinterpreted', like, outta "context" or sumthin'.

    IOKIYAR, apparently.  But if Obama does it?  No, he must be taken exactly as he said it.

    "You didn't BUILD that!"   They based their whole damn RNC Convention on that out-of-context-whopper.

    So, no, they don't get to squirm out of or away from "It's God's will" , a "gift from God" that a woman is impregnated after a rape, fergawdeffinsake.   They said it.  Now they get to hang with it.  

    Why should they apologize?  It is their official policy, after all.    What, Murdoch has to apologize to his Rethug puppet masters for inadvertently telling the truth?  Heh.

  •  Richard Mourdock (R - Tribal Areas) (0+ / 0-)

    Why surprised that the American Taliban have so much in common with their Af-Pakistan brethren?

  •  Republicans should praise Mourdock for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    speaking his honest beliefs.

  •  they're surprised at the reaction they get (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cassandra Waites, jtanneru, tacet, drmah

    I have this happen a lot in real life.  Because my state is so red, right-wingers feel safe saying all manner of outlandish junk... but if you confront them about it and they're not in the company of 2 or 3 more wingnuts, you can watch panic creep into their eyes and they'll try to backpedal and nuance whatever crazy thing they just said.    

    The conservative mind is a very hive-ish thing.  They don't like to be too individual or out of step with the status quo.  It's not that they don't mean it, they're just very, very uncomfortable not being agreed with.  

    I've really enjoyed watching the right-wingers at work soften up their stances on gay rights.  There are a lot of gay people in my office -- it's seriously like 1/3rd gay.  So, the Evangelicals here have gotten uncomfortable being so rabidly anti-gay, so, while they still have problems with gay marriage and such, they've had to dial things back a lot.  Part of it is they actually know and like some gay people now -- it's harder to want to legislate against your friends -- but a lot of it is that they don't have the power of the herd behind them and they don't feel safe being the jerks they'd like to be.

    Behind closed doors, they're agreeing with Mourdock, but they're very conscious of how that sounds to the public at large, so, they want distance... even though they'll go home and say, "He's right, you know."

    Kinda like Romney with his 47% remark -- he means that shit, and he'd say it again if he knew there were no recording devices present.  But he's got to make nice-nice when those 47%ers are listening...  

    "Glenn Beck ends up looking like a fat, stupid child. His face should be wearing a chef's hat on the side of a box of eclairs. " - Doug Stanhope

    by Front Toward Enemy on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:49:43 PM PDT

  •  And the snake bites its tail. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KateCrashes, mchestnutjr

    Tell the Big Lie again and again and again.
    Tell it until they feel it's true.
    You've done your job, my son, until,
    Your echo makes you believe it too.

    I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

    by Gentle Giant on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:49:52 PM PDT

  •  FYI, the 2nd Volume of the GOP Rape Advisory Chart (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tacet now available here
    It features 7 more of your favorite GOP-olden Oldies, including "Lemonade Rape", "Buyer's Remorse Rape" and of course, the classic "Preteen Slut was Asking For It" rape.

    Collect the whole set! Impress your friends (with how revolting the modern Republican Party has become).

  •  one nit pick: these are not conservatives. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pattym922, grover

    it does the label a disservice to call them that.

    I can respect a conservative. These jihadis are laughable.

    For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

    by mdmslle on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:50:43 PM PDT

    •  Well, "conservative" as in they prefer the (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cassandra Waites, mdmslle

      Status quo -- from 700 AD

      Conservation is conservation. You just have to decide on your set point.

      © grover

      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:00:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why? (0+ / 0-)

    So that it pricks the bubble.
    If every time these cretins open their yaps in public and insane garbage like this pours out, it has to be jammed right back down their throats. It not only serves them right, but it will, if accompanied by more of this treatment, eventually get through to the Shallows that their "news" source has misinformed them. That their fantasyland is based on cotton candy and hot air.
    And if left unchallenged, lets them go on to the next increment of crazy/lies, building on this one until they are stacked so deep there's no way to get to the bottom of it to rebuild some veracity.

  •  I think you're mixing up two types of nonsense (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KateCrashes, jtanneru, sagansong

    I agree with you that Mourdock and Akin believe the religiously-derived nonsense, and to that extent their rantings are sincere as self-advertised.  But the rest of what you cite here--

    or claim that President Barack Obama never called the Benghazi attacks an act of terror, or that it's the Democrats who are trying to suppress the vote, or that only sluts want birth control, they are genuinely shocked when reality smacks them hard upside the head.
    ...they really are lying and they know they are.  They're only shocked because they're not accustomed to being called to account, not because they believe they're telling the truth.

    Romney '12: Berlusconi without the sex and alcohol!

    by Rich in PA on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 12:58:42 PM PDT

  •  Reductio ad absurdum vs groupthink (0+ / 0-)

    Akins and Mourdocks take pro-life to its most absurd consequences but groupthink blinds them.

  •  Good point about them believing this stuff. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jtanneru, rlharry

    It's frustrating to me when I see the media letting them off the hook by calling these things "gaffes". This is not a gaffe. The 47% video was not a gaffe.

    A gaffe is when you phrase things poorly or use the wrong word on the spot, and therefore don't convey your intended meaning.

    In these cases, the individuals are describing their actual beliefs, and they're doing so at length, in detail, after considerable thought.

    Yo, media--that is NOT a gaffe!

  •  this isn't going to go away (0+ / 0-)

    the right wing is going to continue pushing America to the right precisely because they do exist in a bubble.  they don't see themselves as being out of the mainstream.  the monsters have reared their heads in every election since Goldwater.  they don't give up.

    i have just started reading Frank Rich's article in New York magazine.  he makes a good argument not to expect the righty radicals to ever go away.  i did hear him say in a TV interview that he hoped he was wrong.  what i have read of the article makes me realize that i have been somewhat in denial since 2000 when i began to really pay attention to politics.  i continue to hope that America will eventually come to its senses in my lifetime.  i worry about my grandchildren's future as it is now.

    The Tea Party Will Win in the End

    I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

    by blue drop on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:30:50 PM PDT

  •  Ideology vs Self-Interest (0+ / 0-)

    I think people tend to underestimate the degree to which American voters are ideological.  You can look at this optimistically or pessimistically.  On the pessimistic side, you have the famous "What's the Matter with Kansas" situation.  Voters ignore their own self-interest and vote according to their beliefs about the size of government.  On the optimistic side, one could think of the American voter as truly engaged in democracy and thinking through the responsibilities of citizenship.

    In my personal experience, I remember abstaining in Bill Clinton's re-election campaign because he signed the Welfare Reform Act, despite the fact that I was not a welfare recipient.  And obviously he wasn't thrown out of office by a bunch of disgruntled "welfare queens."   I remember at the time I knew some single mothers who were poised to lose welfare as a result, but voted for him anyway.

    Similarly, I currently work for an insurance company, but I support Barack Obama despite the fact that my company has been negatively impacted.  Heck, I would vote for a government healthcare solution, even though it would cost my job.

    As an ideological voter, I can relate to and understand other ideological voters as long as I think of it that way.  When I dig into a particular issue, it is hard for me to understand intolerance of GLBT people, assaults on womens' rights, or what I see as an irrational preference for reducing government services.  But I do understand that people like me vote according to their beliefs, not their personal situation.

    With regard to the abortion issue, I think we are all familiar with cases of women who are adamantly anti-choice, yet choose to have abortions.  Or who help their daughters obtain abortions.  It is a different question for them when it comes to their personal lives.  When they vote, they seem to be asking themselves whether they agree with abortion, but when they act in their personal lives they are considering all the personal factors of their individual choices.

    One of the problems of ideological voting is that voters are vulnerable to groupthink, or persuasion by powerful media voices.  Someone who listens to a particular radio demagogue because of their fiscal beliefs finds themselves inundated with comments on unrelated culture war issues.   So Sandra Fluke becomes a "slut" because Rush says so, or Bill Moyers becomes an unnecessary expense because Bill O'Reilly thinks so.

    I certainly hope that Markos is correct about an increase in tolerance in America.  Like the Great Awakening of the last century, maybe the evangelical boom of the last couple of decades is fading.  But I'm not sure that voters should abandon their civic duty to look at issues in terms of ideology instead of just their narrow personal interests.

  •  we need to be wary (5+ / 0-)

    of a potentially insidious offshoot of this fight.  

    Namely, by voicing the most extreme positions, and drawing fire, the Akins and Mourdocks (and other absolutists) create a false credibility and pseudo-moderate mantle for the allegedly more 'nuanced' positions of Romney and other severely anti-choice Republicans.  
    If you haven't noticed already, the mainstream media routinely bestows a 'reasonableness' upon Romney, McCain, et al, and allows them to 'repudiate' the extreme statement, as though it was somehow in conflict with their own stance -- which, incidentally, also happens to be utterly restrictive and extreme.  And, as so often happens in our slanted political discourse, the poles shift and the far right finds itself firmly in the center of the “debate” -- and the debate is the reduced playing field that the right-wing has invented.

    There is no actual daylight between the Mourdock extreme and the "rape/incest/life of the mother" exception.  First of all,  they share the same core ideology and goal.  They are premised on the idea that abortion is against God, which is why the “crazy” utterances of Mourdock and Akin are entirely legitimate, in that context, and why Republicans struggle for politic ways to gently denounce them and then continue to support them.  

    But what may be more important, and yet seems never to be discussed, is the reality that the “rape/incest/life of the mother” exceptions are virtually impracticable.  In a world where abortion is illegal and punished, the licensing of these exceptions would either require the establishment of disturbing and 'Orwellian' bureaucratic entities ("death panels," anyone?) -- or the funneling of such waiver requests through our existing legal structures, which would be wholly unprepared for, and incapable of, administering them.  
    If the proponents of making abortion illegal with exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother strive to be seen as reasonable and mainstream, they should absolutely be required first to spell out how such exceptions would be honored, to the highly improbable satisfaction of all sides.  I expect that they have devised no scheme for this at all, since the "exceptions" position is just another Trojan horse constructed in order to achieve total prohibition.

    Please proceed, Governor.

    by vivadissent on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 01:52:23 PM PDT

    •  Yes. This. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vivadissent, Cassandra Waites, drmah

      I do think it's part of the plan.

      Republicans rarely go off-message. When they do, we should carefully look for a motivation.

      © grover

      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Thu Oct 25, 2012 at 02:03:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  women's body issues are men's pocket book issues (0+ / 0-)

    men should be aware that if Romney wins and they gets a woman pregnant, they'll have to pay TONS of money for child support for 18 years.

    Women's body issues definitely effect men through the pocket book.

    I'm surprised not one ad or commentater on the left mentions this.

    Obama should use the child support in an ad for sexually active men...

  •  there is another reason (0+ / 0-)

    And that is, that they not only believe this stuff, but they are comfortable that the people they are speaking to also believe it and are comfortable hearing it.   So they think nothing of making such remarks, because to them and their audience, the remarks aren't offensive.

    It's not that they think it, it's that they think it's OK to say it, aloud, in a public environment.

Ed in Montana, Pandora, Shockwave, jazzizbest, TX Unmuzzled, Bob Friend, Zinman, rebop, boadicea, mrblifil, Last Mechanic, Redfire, sockpuppet, TexDem, pointsoflight, Eyesbright, JCPOK, Jujuree, Steven Payne, defluxion10, betson08, The Zipper, inclusiveheart, monkee, zerelda, Curt Matlock, valadon, Jen Hayden, Longwing, Gowrie Gal, 3goldens, dewtx, FutureNow, Mikado, Sun Tzu, Phil S 33, coolbreeze, Circle, coloradorob, begone, lgmcp, detroitmechworks, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, flying shams, vigilant meerkat, MeMeMeMeMe, Themistoclea, Ky DEM, kestrel9000, Im with Rosey, fou, blueoasis, Alexandra Lynch, DSPS owl, democracy is coming, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, Dreaming of Better Days, shaharazade, Statusquomustgo, crystal eyes, kurious, 73rd virgin, john07801, anotherdemocrat, hawaii2, Loudoun County Dem, ColoTim, gloriana, flumptytail, sfbob, newpioneer, cyncynical, jnhobbs, GeorgeXVIII, leonard145b, TomP, Empower Ink, gizmo59, mconvente, VelvetElvis, DarkHawk98, Cordwainer, bythesea, Its any one guess, icebergslim, catly, mofembot, Gemina13, luckylizard, get the red out, MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel, Sun dog, Rick Aucoin, LinSea, maryabein, oxfdblue, kevinpdx, Larsstephens, Railfan, barkworsethanbite, legalchic, tellthestories, rja, ericlewis0, slice, annieli, Front Toward Enemy, spooks51, pb3550, implicate order, henrythefifth, iowacaucus, lillyspad, dbradhud, smiley7, thomask, BarackStarObama, wynns world, Merry Light, Vatexia, jolux, jham710, DEMonrat ankle biter, ParkRanger, Pinto Pony, anodnhajo, a2nite, This old man, Arahahex, arizonablue, George3, pearldive, live1, Steve Canella, Shawn Russell, koosah, JayRaye, LaraJones, Lucy West, Smoh, Catkin, pianogramma, thatpj

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site