The men of today's patriarchal GOP have become quite the experts on rape. While there have been a number of offensive comments made by various male Republican candidates, the winner, up until last week, was Todd Akin's claim that women who are being "legitimately" raped produce a magic spermicide which "shuts down" pregnancy. But a new contender has emerged in the contest for most disgusting Republican rape comments with a claim, by US Senate candidate Richard Mourdock, that pregnancies resulting from rape are a very special gift bag from Jesus. While this has been discussed in the evil, librul media, Fox News seems to have put a cone of almost total protective silence on the issue. Bill O'Reilly and Laura Ingraham, however, during a segment promoting the view that women are starting to show some love for Mitt Romney, did mention Mr. Mourdoch. But rather than address the offensiveness of the comment, they brushed it off because Mourdoch has no connection to Mitt Romney. Scuse me? Really?
O'Reilly and Ingraham (showing off her great big, Catholic cross bling) talked about polling data which shows that Mitt Romney has erased his polling deficit among women. Ingraham "joked" that while the war on women was a "cute" meme for the summer, women are now realizing that there are more important issues such as the economy and - wait for it - Benghazi. (Oh snap, Ingraham got to work in Fox's current anti-Obama obsession). She continued to pimp for Romney by claiming that women are reassured by candidates "who have a plan." (Right, tax cuts resulting in magic economic growth). She claimed that women were reassured by Romney's having "played it safe" in the last debate.
O'Reilly jokingly asked Ingraham if she is assured that Romney "won't seize birth control...kick down doors and take birth control out of the homes of women..." Ingraham joked back that "he and Ann Romney are going to be blocking the door at every pharmacy..." When Ingraham said that the arguments about Romney's positions on women's health issues are "falling away but they're trying with that Mourdock thing," O'Reilly interjected "they're still trying." After he cited "a Senate candidate in Indiana," Ingraham, who just returned from *Indiana, responded that this issue is "all over Indiana." O'Reilly reported that "he said, uh...if you're raped and you deliver a child it's God's will and now this is huge." He asserted that "this is lighting the fuse to go back into this but Mourdock has nothing to do with Romney, nothing to do with anything." Ingraham claimed that folks she spoke to in Indiana are more concerned with the economy than social issues. Bill then whined that the "egregious" Libya situation isn't "catching on."
While O'Reilly and Ingraham dismissed the threat that a Romney administration would pose to women, they ignored the reality that Romney will appoint SCOTUS judges that will overturn Roe v Wade - a court decision with which Romney disagrees. He will sign legislation to defund Planned Parenthood - a place where low income women get birth control. He supported the Blunt Amendment which would allow Catholic employers to deny coverage of birth control for their female workers. He supports a "Personhood Amendment" that gives a zygote the same rights as the woman who carries it. He only supports abortion in cases of rape, incest, and health of the mother. Not exactly mainstream. So women do need to fear a Romney presidency if they care about reproductive rights - which conservative Catholics O'Reilly and Ingraham clearly do not!
But regarding the lack of connection between Romney and Mourdock. As Jon Stewart said, Bill O'Reilly is "full of shit." Mitt Romney has endorsed Richard Mourdick and has appeared in Richard Mourdock's political ads which feature his endorsement. Romney's campaign cut its own ad on Mourdock's behalf. Romney maintains his support for Mourdock and will not pull his ad. The Romney campaign has said that the candidate "disagrees with Richard Mourdock's comments, and they do not reflect his views." So Mourdock has "nothing to do with Romney?" Not so much.
*Spoke at an "Americans for Prosperity" (A Koch brothers advocacy group) venue about Obama's "failing agenda."
The increasing fervency of the Romney surrogates both in public and on multiple websites indicates what looks like a growing panic in the GOP. They’re clinging to a small number of polls (mostly from Rasmussen) to try to stay hopeful, but the aggregates are clearly showing Obama ahead. This is leading to angrier and angrier statements from people like John Sununu and Sean Hannity.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Fox try to peddle something next Thursday about Benghazi or next Friday about the next economic report. And then this all comes down to Tuesday the 6th at 8pm West Coast Time. If the results come in the way they are being projected at 538, we could be looking at some really sullen faces at Fox for a few days. It could always go the other way, of course.
And these SAME people say the will repeal Obamacare because they don’t want Government in ‘their’ (tax payer paid for) health care.
It truly is maddening ignorance.
If Mourdock’s public comments have “nothing to do with” Mitt Romney — despite the fact that the latter has appeared in ads for the former — that can only mean the lack of public comments by Bill Ayers and/or Jeremiah Wright have “nothing to do with” President Obama . . . right?
This reminds me of when, on a previous “Factor”, a liberal (Colmes perhaps?) pointed out to BOR that Romney’s first anti-Obama ad had been purposely designed to make it look like a 2008 McCain campaign quote were Obama’s own words (âif we keep talking about the economy, weâre going to lose.â). The pro-Romney ad was extremely deceitful and folks were talking about it. But BOR claimed he didn’t know what ad the liberal was talking about. Huh?! Again, I’m just a regular citizen who knew about that ad yet BOR with the FOX “news” brain room and a whole team of researchers at his disposal didn’t know about it? Sure, FOX “news” didn’t make the blatantly dishonest ad a topic of discussion on their shows but I find that very hard to believe that BOR wouldn’t know anything about it.
If he truly didn’t know about either of these ads, then BOR should be ashamed to call himself a political analyst and should get the eff off the TV. If he did know about these ads but deliberately chose to lie about them, then he should be ashamed to say that he’s “looking out for the folks” and get the eff off the TV.
And BOR’s whole bit about how Romney isn’t going to kick down women’s door and snatch their birth control is nothing more than a straw man that BOR set up so he could get his snark on. Of course, Romney isn’t going go after birth control in the bogus way BOR laid out. He’s going go after it via the Congressional and legal systems. BOR is being extremely dishonest with the folks.