reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE
I may be misunderstanding you, but the post seems to be a little misleading. It may be the article's fault.
Todd Atkins was sacrificed by his own party for saying what many in the GOP believe.
Throwing one of their own under the bus, says alot about the GOP ,
This is one of the more confusing sentences I've run across, but then
again, I'm slow. (Oh, by the way, I assume you're talking about Todd Akin, the Missouri Senate candidate.) You note the party rejected him and his
remarks, are trying to get rid of him, and threw him under the bus. Yet the party agrees with him? And you seem to imply that it was a bad thing for
him to be rejected? Should he have been praised? Are you opposed to all candidates and parties that throw a member under the bus?
what says more is how many others in their ranks feel the same as Atkins,
How many would that be, and what evidence do you have?
ontop of the fact that the GOP added it to their party platform for the convention.
What did Akin say that was added to their plank?
The plank is the same or extremely similiar to the pro-life plank the Republicans have used since 2000.
Will Republicans lose the White House but maintain control of the House and win the Senate to push their agenda through and over ride a
presidential veto ?
The quick answer is no, it's impossible. To override a veto, the Republicans would need 67 Senators. At most they will
the party voted to incorporate strict anti-abortion language into its platform, with no exception for pregnancies that result from rape or
As noted, it's old language. and there was no mention in the plank of rape or incest either way. That is to be left up to the
Additionally, there are more than 40 House and Senate candidates besides Akin -- including Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the man who has been tapped
as Mitt Romney's vice presidential running mate -- who want to ban abortion access even for women who have been victims of rape or incest
Even if that were true, and I'll explain why it may not be, you've got, what, 8% of the candidates feeling that way? But there is scant evidence to
show that's the case. That number refers to the candidates who have filled out a questionnaire on life issues and have been endorsed by a group.
There was a question on rape and incest, but there is no evidence that they had to answer that in a certain way to get an endorsement. There were
three pages of questions in that questionnaire.
Besides, wasn't the comment that everyone is objecting to was Akin's thought that forcibly raped women weren't as likely to get pregnant? That's
not an issue that the Republicans are even considering. (Off-topic, and just for argument's sake, what kind of lab experiment could be set up to
test Akin's claim?)