Posted on 08/24/2012 4:51:36 AM PDT by huldah1776
ST. LOUIS, August 23, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Now that Todd Akin has said he will be staying in the race for Missouri’s U.S. Senate seat, senior pro-life and conservative leaders including Phyllis Schlafly, Gary Bauer, and others are telling the Republican Party establishment to back off its “over-the-top” campaign to have him step aside. Phyllis Schlafly, Eagle Forum founder, supports Todd Akin. Phyllis Schlafly, Eagle Forum founder, supports Todd Akin.
Phyllis Schlafly, who emerged on the conservative scene with her 1964 book A Choice Not an Echo, rapped party elites for disenfranchising their own voters. “I don’t think people like that should make the decision,” she said. “The people of Missouri should make that decision.”
Both national pro-family leaders and local grassroots conservative leadership are confused and offended by national party leaders such as Karl Rove, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, and Charles Krauthammer, who have vowed to cut funds from Akin’s candidacy or pushed him to withdraw from the race.
Columnist Ann Coulter has suggested Republicans stage a write-in candidacy for former Governor Kit Bond.
“The on-going parade of public denunciations by various GOP leaders is over-the-top and counterproductive,” said Gary Bauer, a former presidential candidate and leader of the Campaign for Working Families, in a statement e-mailed to LifeSiteNews.com, “Some of their public attacks on Akin have been more aggressive than anything some of these leaders have ever said about Barack Obama and his truly radical rejection of the sanctity of human life and his promotion of abortion-on-demand paid for by the taxpayer!”
(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )
Ryan Bomberger of the Radiance Foundation had a personal stake in the issue. The child of rape, he said, “Quite frankly, I’m glad such a pro-family, pro-life stalwart, despite a few bumps and lots of scrapes, is not quitting under pressure from hypocritical pro-abortion radicals and spineless Republicans.”
Iowa Congressman Steve King, who faced his own media feeding frenzy over abortion remarks taken out of context this week, was as blunt, stating that George Soros-funded media are now “dictating the response of leading Republicans.”
The Show Me state’s conservative leaders have flocked to Akin’s side, as well.
John Putnam, Missouri state coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, said the national party should be “circling the wagons” around their candidate, not condemning him.
Akin won his races with a family-fueled campaign that defied the state’s Republican establishment. That has led local media to conclude he owes them nothing.
If he loses the race, the Republican Party will not take back control of the U.S. Senate. But pro-family leaders say if the Republicans replace Akin, they will almost certainly lose the race.
“After allegations of sexual indiscretions in sealed divorce records, which were leaked to the media, Republican leaders pressured Jack Ryan to withdraw from the 2004 Illinois Senate race,” said Vision America Action President Dr. Rick Scarborough. “That’s how we ended up with Barack Obama in the White House—a steep price to pay for Republican squeamishness.”
“Missouri voters – who gave Akin the GOP Senate nomination – are wise enough to decide who they’d prefer to send to Washington, ultra-liberal Clair McCaskill or a decent man and an authentic conservative who misspoke,” he said.
Many see the tempest-in-a-tea-party as little more than an attempt to marginalize pro-life voices within the Republican Party. Judie Brown of the American Life League wrote, “This is really not about Akin at all; it is about the red herring that pro-abortion forces have used for years to define genuine pro-life apologists as zealots, fanatics and unrealistic Pollyannas.”
Despite Akin’s remarks, Public Policy Polling, a Democrat-leaning firm, found him polling one point ahead of Democratic incumbent Senator Claire McCaskill, 44-43. “GOP voters dislike McCaskill so much they’re not going to vote for her no matter what their nominee does,” the firm found. “Independent voters haven’t moved at all either.”
Putnam said from his perspective, the only way Akin can prevail is “if the pro-life community gets behind him and makes this a national campaign.”
He allowed in Democrat help to do that.
How is he supposed to stop what his Party opponent does?
And how is action taken by his Party opponent supposed to be him "allowing in" Democrat help?
"You stop running those ads about me, Claire!"
"Bite me, Akin, I'll run anything I want."
"Tell your Party members not to cross Party lines in an open primary, Claire."
"Bite me, Akin, they can vote any way they want."
That's political reality!
Wow, so that is his replacement plan? Overturn a single socialized medicine scheme and replace it with 50 mandated socialized medicine schemes?
And these Freepers are all so fixated on throwing Akin under the bus just to ensure that the RINO Senate will have one more vote to institute Romney’s backdoor socialist medicine plan?
What a bunch of cowards. Appeasers. Wimps.
If you state something is legitimate, it means you have categorized it.
Just like you did when you answered "Hell no".
If something is legitimate, ergo something else has to be illegitimate.
Yep, a false report of rape is an illegitimate rape as even you have categorized it.
If there are legitimate rapes, then there has to be illegitimate rapes.
I agree.
Yet we're right back to the unanswered question...
Where did he "equate", which is what your "equal sign" means, legitimate rape to be the same as an illegitimate, or false report of, rape?
There is a reason he hasn’t renounced RomneyCare.
Somebody remind me again why I should vote for Romney.
He has lost nothing.
TYhe Rasmussen poll is a GOPe ass-kiss poll to try to take out a conservative candidate.
You’re a part of that excrement-fest.
I think that your words say all that we need to know about you.
There is only one reason that’s been given that has some justification. However, even that is subject to Romney’s deceitful personality. That is that he is a personal friend of Benjamin Netanyahu and he will be better for Israel than will Obama.
Taxes: nope, he calls them “revenue enhancements” and does them anyway.
Abortion: nope, not only does he accept rape/incest exceptions, but he, in the past, is a flaming liberal on the issue.
Homosexualism: Nope. Not even Obama has advocated homosexualism the way Romney has.
Gun Control: Nope. Romney says that he likes bi-partisan gun legislation.
Big Gov’t Health Care: Nope. He wants you state to impose it instead of your fed. He’s among the idiots who believe the constituion says, “If it’s an area in which the fed can’t violate your rights, then states are allowed to.” That’s their interpretation of ‘states rights’.
Cronyism: Nope. Just different cronies than Obama.
This truly is a choice between Sodom or Gomorrah.
BTW, in case you didn't know, if you want to italicize a previous post copied for reference to make it easier to read, just put < i > (no spaces) at the beginning and < /i > (no spaces) at the end.
“TYhe Rasmussen poll is a GOPe ass-kiss poll to try to take out a conservative candidate.”
That river still flowing through Egypt there editor-surveyor?
The rape was horrific.
The reciprocity was satisfying.
He's like Romney after his agents in Virginia manage to spoil the primary ~ he kept silent. He's still silent.
When good men refuse to speak out against bad acts that means ~ what?
It means they aren't as good as you want them to be.
I have suggested dumping both of these guys for the same reasons.
And neither have their broad spectrum Conservative credentials in line ~ just an ACU rating (where applicable).
Supporting Akin is tarnishing your own conservative credentials.
I'm not here to be "popular" nor do I "move with the herd" as you damn well know. I think for myself and if that's considered a detriment by others then I count it as an asset simply because it causes such seeming consternation.
Hanging with the Democrats is not the way Conservatives do it.
you haven’t asked a question. you’ve made a declamation but there’s no there there!
So how do you think she would have responded if he had asked her to stop her "help" as you put it?
That’s not a question ~ all I know about Claire McCaskill is that she is an evil person. She might have sent one of her goons over to rough him up ~ just any sort of thing ~ figuring out what a crazy Democrat is going to say or do is really not in my campaign. I’m focused on Republicans!
You give an example of what she might do, I asked what you thought she might say!
...figuring out what a crazy Democrat is going to say or do is really not in my campaign. I’m focused on Republicans!
If that were so then you wouldn't even be bringing up what she did in providing him "help". Her actions wouldn't be worthy of comment, according to your latest statement.
Does your "campaign" have an agenda?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.