Posted on 08/21/2012 10:12:41 AM PDT by doug from upland
Rep. Todd Akin, facing calls to step aside from his bid to challenge Sen. Claire McCaskill, once called for his party's state house leader to resign his leadership post following a drunk driving incident, according to local news reports.
Akin, who used the term "legitimate rape" to argue the false claim that women who are raped don't get pregnant, called on then Missouri House GOP leader, Mark Richardson, to quit his post in 1997.
From the Columbia Tribune:
Republican lawmakers interviewed yesterday said they were expecting Richardson to step aside. ``That is the logical thing, just in terms of keeping our focus on legislation,'' said Rep. Todd Akin, R-St. Louis.
A host of Republican leaders have called on Akin to resign. Sen. John Cornyn has pledged to without NRSC support unless Akin quits the race against the vulnerable Democrat.
And he's coming back on Hannity again today...
That is going too far. He is a good guy who said something stupid. Something stupid enough to give the seat to McCasKILL. He chose to be a Republican, not an independent. He joined the team. He is going to be pummeled on the mound. He had a 10 run lead, is blowing the lead, and does not want to come out and let a relief pitcher snuff McCasKILL.
Thanks for the post Doug. I know you are incredible in your hard work on conservative causes. I was making general statements mostly. We could have another pro-life candidate step in, but why can’t we just say Akin screwed up and move on. Seriously he made an error. No murder, heck not even the n-word. Just a mistake. I think he is redeemable and I really wish everyone else would take it as it is, a mistake.
I think the biggest problem is going to be that he and his misstatements will be the issue, rather than the important issues on which we can win. McCasKILL and the RAT thugs are not going to have to defend their miserable and misguided record. They will just keep hammering about legitimate rape. The media will support them in that, and she will never have to answer the substantive questions we want to ask. If the media were actually not an arm of the RATS, he would have a chance to make a comeback and win the battle. At this point, I think he has lost the seat. All the oxygen has been sucked out of the room. Who is going to donate to the campaign to get out the message?
If Steelman, another pro-life conservative (or am I wrong about that?) is in the battle, we get a pro-life candidate and a former VP fighting for her in the state. And you know Sarah will fight her heart out for the other Sarah. I think a strong woman in the race puts McCasKILL on the defensive to have to defend an indefensible record.
Wow, some of us have lives outside of FR. I will read the article when I get a chance. Be forewarned, I learned to be skeptical of press reports right here on FR, where healthy skepticism used to be de rigeur.
Do you even know where his House district (2) is? Some of St. Louis County, and part of the surrounding areas. He has handily won reelection there, he was popular. It is no surprise that he won the part of the state that keeps reelecting him.
Even if Akin went, Steelman would not get the nod. You can look up our “sore loser” law. You all need to get over Sarah’s pick not winning (maybe that’s not you, but it IS DFU’s deal apparently).
Okay, I read through the article, no mention anywhere of an operation chaos with democrats crossing over. Frankly, the advertisement likely caused more conservatives to vote for him. Which I’m sure was McCaskill’s intent, but it’s a gamble. She’s in trouble against ALL who ran.
Now I need to make dinner for my brood before they turn on each other and chow down like FReepers. LOL!
No. We have sore loser laws in Missouri. I wouldn’t write her in, anyway.
Are you even in Missouri?
How is there any comparison between someone who committed a crime vs. someone who made a verbal gaffe, which all politicians do, and which the opposing party always make hay over, usually to little effect because the voters care about substantive issues, not gotcha games?
I’m more concerned about getting Romney’s tax returns released so we can find out if he is hiding any nefarious or criminal activity.
Wow. Just wow. Human filth? I feel like I’m at DU. I am sickened. :(
So why haven't Republicans started a boycott of Rush Limbaugh so he could get taken off the air over the Sandra Fluke "slut" comment? You don't think Limbaugh is is a little more prominent and well-known as a Republican than Akin? Why so many double standards going on here?
I’m impressed at someone who will stand up to “Saint” Danforth and John Cornyn too. Not many would do that. Let the establishment go with the Democrats; there’s where their heart is anyway.
Is Akin more selfish than Mitt Romney who refuses to release his tax returns despite his selfish secrecy being used as a non-stop campaign attack by the Democrats that is sure to be brought up in the debates?
Yeah, Romney & the Boyz really showed Palin who was boss in the Missouri primary, didn't they? ;-)
I just don't buy this conspiracy nonsense.
re: I’m more concerned about getting Romney’s tax returns released so we can find out if he is hiding any nefarious or criminal activity.
I love your sarcasm. You have brilliantly nailed it. That is exactly what the Dems are after, except they are not going to find nefarious or criminal activity. They know that. Their strategy is to scour through every line of every return and create issues out of non-issues that Romney has to then defend. They will put out the talking points to the press every day and all their pals will create issues to put Romney on the defensive. It will allow them to keep the issues away from the real problems -— jobs, the economy, the debt, Islamic terror, and Iran getting a nuke.
Nicely done. Using sarcasm can be very effective and you did it masterfully.
What is so bad in the returns that releasing them could be worse than the Dems stoking the fear of the unknown and the idea that Romney is secretive and has something to hide?
Bottom line, Romney should step aside so we can promote Ryan and have a candidate who doesn’t create these side issues for us that the Democrats can demagogue and create distractions out of.
I do not think I made even one comment during the Missouri primary.
Apparently I misunderstood your post when I gave a response. I sincerely apologize for thinking you were brilliant.
Reading comprehension has always been a problem with some, so I will state again what I stated in my response.
Their strategy is to scour through every line of every return and create issues out of non-issues that Romney has to then defend. They will put out the talking points to the press every day and all their pals will create issues to put Romney on the defensive. It will allow them to keep the issues away from the real problems -— jobs, the economy, the debt, Islamic terror, and Iran getting a nuke.
I hope it helped for you to read it a second time.
What is so bad in the returns that releasing them could be worse than the Dems stoking the fear of the unknown and the idea that Romney is secretive and has something to hide?
Romney not releasing the tax returns allows the Democrats to put out the talking points to the press every day about the secrets Romney's hiding to put Romney on the defensive. It will allow them to keep the issues away from the real problems -— jobs, the economy, the debt, Islamic terror, and Iran getting a nuke.
Missouri didn’t vote for Romney.
I see the stubborn thickheadedness didn't die out in that era. All you Missouri conservatives gonna ride into town with Pitt Mackeson & Toddy Akin?
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.