Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: exDemMom
Do you really think it's "factually correct" that women don't get pregnant from "bona fide" rape?

In Indiana, candidate Mourdock claimed that it was God's will when women got pregnant from the act of rape; probably the media's fault that anyone was offended by that comment too.

These guys were not the innocent victims of some wholly unforeseeable conspiracy of the Bilderburger media cabal. They were, instead, breathtakingly unprepared for big time politics and showed it badly at their public debates.

I had the unpleasant experience of listening to the whole Mourdock - Donnelly debate; Mourdock was rude, ill prepared and inarticulate throughout the entire evening. Indiana elected conservative Republicans to 2/3 of its congressional seats and to the Statehouse in the 2012 election; that we didn't elect a conservative Republican to the Senate was the candidate's fault, not the media's.

119 posted on 01/24/2013 6:47:42 AM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies ]


To: Mr. Lucky
Do you really think it's "factually correct" that women don't get pregnant from "bona fide" rape?

Yes, it *is* factually correct that it is extremely rare for women to get pregnant from forced rape.

In Indiana, candidate Mourdock claimed that it was God's will when women got pregnant from the act of rape; probably the media's fault that anyone was offended by that comment too.

I am not familiar with Mourdock. However, I will venture a guess based on my familiarity with media tactics. He probably said something along the lines of every child being a gift of God, and the media spun that to give people the impression that he said that it is God's will for every woman to be raped until she becomes pregnant.

These guys were not the innocent victims of some wholly unforeseeable conspiracy of the Bilderburger media cabal. They were, instead, breathtakingly unprepared for big time politics and showed it badly at their public debates.

They were, to a large extent, victims of the mass media. There isn't a person alive who can say exactly the right thing at the right time, and the media demands superhuman powers of communication from conservatives. In contrast, they don't even care if liberals speak incoherently and make statements of profound idiocy. People should be elected on their ideas, even if they can't express them perfectly.

I had the unpleasant experience of listening to the whole Mourdock - Donnelly debate; Mourdock was rude, ill prepared and inarticulate throughout the entire evening.

Being rude and ill-prepared is a different matter. There is no excuse to be rude, and people should be aware of the issues before entering a debate. If they know their stuff, that should come through even if they don't have the oratorical powers of Rush. We conservatives should not allow the media to get away with sliming other conservatives just because they misspeak.

124 posted on 01/24/2013 4:23:13 PM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson