They didn’t flub it. They said what they meant. They’re just so ridiculously insulated from the real world that it never occurred to them that normal people would think they’re assholes.
She’s free to go off the Pill. She’s free to be celibate and (barring rape) never need it. She’s free to have sex protected or unprotected. She’s free to get pregnant, and keep the baby, or not. How is she not free?
She just got married. He has a job; she doesn’t. I don’t know if she’s on the Pill just to prevent pregnancy or to regulate her cycles. She has been posting and Bible-thumping extensively about how important it is to submit to one’s hubby and obey him as long as he’s in step with God’s laws, God does not like divorce unless it’s for reasons of adultery or abandonment, if you don’t follow those rules you’re a blasphemer, America needs to be on its guard since Obama got re-elected, universal healthcare = dictatorship, Tea Party Patriots rule, America is #1 and always in the right, and so on.
Maybe the answer is somewhere in there. Who knows. I don’t get it. But then, I don’t think the same way.
I’m still not seeing what part of that isn’t covered by “she’s a moron.”
Assuming that is true, a person with half a brain, who is a politician no-less, can come up with a reasonable one liner to deflect that and move on to something else.
Question to candidate #1 who supports raping 10 year olds: How can you justify your position of raping 10 year old children?
Answer: That’s an issue that has powerful opposition, but what do we say as a country when those same 10 year olds are in a failing education system? When they don’t have a two parent family? When they are denied health care? I submit that as a country, we must look at the totality of how our children are treated instead of focusing on one issue. As James Madison once said…
Yeah. I concede the point. It’s just hard being related to a branch of the fam that has gone so far to the right that they’re light-years away from the rest of us–for the most part.
Grin! I’ve heard it in person; it’s almost exactly as you describe it. And, yeah, any competent politician should have mastered the art of the non-answer, since he was first running for Junior High School Class Vice-President!
In order to know when to give the non-answer, you have to already understand that a substantial portion of the electorate is going to be repulsed by a truthful answer. It still comes down to the fact that they’re extremely isolated from mainstream views.
Abortion and “family values” were the 80s Republican way of getting people to vote against their own economic best interest.
Obama talked about about abortion more than Romney ever did. I’m sick of the blue party using it as a scare tactic and some folks in the red party saying dumb stuff about it. Romney focused on the Economy, not abortion, but it played a big role in Obama’s campaign. Rather you want to believe it or not. There were many ads. Abortion is legal. Even if Romney won it still was going to be LEGAL. But Dems know some in their base believe otherwise. Just like some in their base believe Jim Crow is going to make a comeback.
That is true. I don’t live in a swing state, but I did see those ads you’re referring to online and on shows discussing the election. Romney: One ad. Obama: A hundred thousand.
We’ve already gone through this. The Democrats talked about it a lot because Republicans were quietly passing hundreds of bills at the state level to restrict access to abortion. It makes no difference if abortion is legal if there are no abortion clinics, women are forced to pay out of pocket for extra unnecessary deterrent ultrasounds, prohibited from using their health insurance to pay for the abortion, and are required to wait a month before getting one. It’s not a scare tactic when these laws are actually being passed, but you want to paper over it with “jobs jobs economy jobs jobs!” while dramatically restricting abortion rights and having the balls to complain when you are challenged about it publicly.
Yea. If Republicans don’t like losing elections because they hold and enact unpopular opinions, there is a more sensible solution than screaming:
‘No fair - our opponent is drawing attention to our unpopular opinions and policies’.
Yes, we have been through this already. RTFT, Muffy_Simba.
The abortion issue will never quit being controversial for a very simple reason; the difference between what people say, and what people do. People are just people. I believe there is a large population of people who strongly object to abortion on ethical, moral or religious grounds. They are ‘right’ fighters. Mountains of evidence and reason are useless to them, they believe they hold the high moral ground and, above all they are so ‘right’ they should get to say what’s right for everyone.
But, I believe, there is also a quite invisible and silent group, within that group that, although they are true hearted conservatives, fiscally, religiously, etc, they have also experienced, in their own lives or the lives of someone close to them, someone making the hard choice, as the best thing to do.
And they knew it their hearts it was right. That person shouldn’t have a child. They are neither strong enough to surrender to adoption or mature enough to parent. Or, their life will be ruined, they will drop out of high school, work a shit job, divorce, drink etc, but ruination all around.
People don’t go around bragging on feeling such things especially in cases where they’ve always been a staunch, loud Conservative, within a tight Christian community.
Whatever they talk up after church on Sunday, when they get into the voting booth, I think they vote their conscience. They think about how horrid it would have been if Susie had to have that child by that awful boy at 14yrs. Or about that poor girl that was raped or a victim of incest. Or someone who finds herself pregnant as she’s walking away from a violent relationship.
My point is, I have believed all along what is sinking the Pubs on this issue, is their own people. Who stand in the booth and think, ‘Nobody is making them have abortions if they don’t think it’s right, but gosh, there are times when it truly ought to be a choice.’, and vote accordingly.
The Conservative base is so close minded and tight, that these people choose not to speak up, rather just silently keep it to themselves.
You think they will then vote based on this reality. I think that they will then be my mother, who makes exceptions for things when it’s someone she knows, but then votes according to party lines.
So a hypothetical conversation with my mom would go like this:
Me: Are you voting against gay marriage?
Mom: Yes.
Me: But Jim and John want to get married. Do you really have a problem with them getting married?
Mom: Oh, not them. They’re good guys.
Me: So you’ll vote for gay marriage?
Mom: No, I’ll vote against it.
Me: But you said Jim and John should be able to get married.
Mom: Well, they’re an exception.
ANY issue I can think of she’ll make these “exceptions” but it won’t change her vote.
When my first husband was on disability, she’d rail about Those People who were on disability or who were a drain on the state. I’d remind her that Steve was on disability, and she’d say, “Oh, I didn’t mean HIM.”
Rasmussen, by the way, says
[
](54% Are Pro-Choice, 38% Pro-Life - Rasmussen Reports®)
'Course, I don’t trust Rasmussen. At all. But Republicans love them so… there you have it.
The Abortion Drum is a dangerously imprecise instrument; do not beat it without making sure there are no pregnant women within 50 yards.
Obama ran more abortion ads than Romney ever did. Abortion is LEGAL. Even if Romney won it still was going to be LEGAL, but that didn’t stop Barry from running a million and one ads telling voters it’s going to become illegal. Because there are people in that base who believe it. Obama could make a television series using his abortion ads. Mourdock’s comments remind what the media did to Whoopi Goldberg’s comments. Nobody is Pro-Rape other than rapists and people who get off on that kinda thing.
Abortion is legal, for now. But it would be naive to assume that it will always continue to be legal no matter who gets elected.
As mentioned by others, it could remain technically legal, while so many bills are passed restricting it that it effectively becomes unavailable to most women. Also, if Romney won and he got the opportunity to appoint new justices for the Supreme Court, he most likely would have had a litmus test that they would overturn Roe vs. Wade. Then individual states would be free to make abortion illegal. Sure, not all of the states would do so, but I would bet that at least some states would.
Also, I’m willing to say that Romney as an individual person may or may not have strong feelings about abortion or making abortion illegal. But given the obvious and ridiculous pandering he has done to ingratiate himself with the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party, and the fact that he is apparently willing to do or say anything that will get him elected, I absolutely believe that President Romney would have taken steps to restrict abortion and stack the Supreme Court against Roe vs. Wade, if he thought it was politically advantageous or would get him more evangelical support when he had to run for reelection.
When the Republican presidential candidate, and the VP candidate, and the printed party platform don’t agree on an issue as important as abortion. And when Republican’s open their mouths to say words like, “legitimate rape”, or call someone wanting their employer insurance to cover their birth control a slut, you really can’t lay the discussion of abortion at the door of the democrats, in my opinion. Yeah, they may have addressed it a lot - because it matters to people. But it was the Republication actions and words that were driving the discussion. They made it about abortion. The US population has a right to know where they stand. They could not agree even among themselves, and every time it came up they put their foot in their mouths. Basically illustrating exactly why they could not be trusted on such an important issue.