In Missouri No Compromise

vanity | 24 August 2012 | Nathan Bedford

[nathanbedford]

This is an occasion in which the vituperation of the pontificators is exceeded only by their ignorance. The inescapable reality is that no one no knows whether Todd Akin could have survived his gaffe and gone on to win what should have been an easy victory in Missouri against a hapless opponent. Yet it is precisely that level of ignorance over what has blithely been assumed in this controversy that lent confidence to self-appointed pundits like Ann Coulter to venture onto national cable television and presume for all of America, not to mention all of Missouri, that Todd Akin was finished and must withdraw.

Suppose Coulter, who since her crush on Governor Christie which followed her unaccountable love affair with Governor Romney, has proclaimed the establishment side of every Republican issue, had instead gone before the cameras and used her undeniable charms and accomplishments to defend rather than bury Todd Akin? Suppose the whole of the Republican establishment had behaved the way we know the Democrat establishment behaves?

My point is there is no answer to these rhetoricals, because the behavior of the Republican establishment in the immediate wake of Akin's gaffe foreclosed all debate and every viable counterargument. Missouri is going Republican in this cycle and Akin would have won the election but for his gaffe-or but for the firestorm ignited in the wake of his gaffe by Republicans themselves. We will never know which is true.

It is obvious that there is really no viable option for Akin now but to withdraw. But that does not mean that we conservatives should condone what transpired here. Who gave these people veto over the choice of the voters in the primaries in Missouri? By what moral right does the Republican Senatorial Election Committee or Republican National Committee presume to renege on its promise of campaign funds as punishment for speech it regards, not as contrary to Republican platform being fashioned before the convention as we speak, but as an offense against political correctness?

Who decides whether Todd Atkins gaffe was so egregious that it was indefensible? Was there not a better than even chance that he could have survived in Missouri? How much of the certitude expressed by Republican pundits was the foundation of a self-fulfilling prophecy? Would not Todd Akin with the protection of a righteous Republican wall of support have been able to finesse this gaffe and recover in the next 75 days?

Does candor demand that we acknowledge that the Republican establishment threw Todd Akin under the bus not out of concern primarily for the outcome of the Senatorial race in Missouri but for concern for the candidacy of Mitt Romney? How can we know?

We have seen this phenomenon before. We have seen it applied to Republicans of all stripes but mainly against conservative Republicans. We have seen the way, Peggy Noonan and others abandoned Sarah Palin. We watch the Majority Leader the United States Senate destroyed over a birthday toast to a fellow Senator. We watched the Senatorial campaign of George Allen systematically destroyed by the Washington Post for uttering the indefinable term, "Macaca." The list is endless and it would include Republican after Republican who too often was abandoned in the crunch by his party. This pattern reflects a level of moral cowardice which must be remedied. It is one which I cited in my about page.

Talk jockeys are making much of the fact that the keynote speaker at the Democratic convention will be the rapist, Bill Clinton, the disgraced former president who was impeached and disbarred for resorting to perjury to fix a court case. How can the Democrats surmount the indisputable fact that Bill Clinton is a perjurer-we know this to be the fact not because the Bible tells us so but because the DNA tells us so-but we Republicans must fall on our swords if we utter an ill considered gaffe?

The obvious explanation for all of this is that every Republican faces a tsunami shit storm blown at him by the media which intimidates every other Republican away from the field of strife.

We have seen how the Romney/Republican establishment dealt with the foreknowledge that their vice presidential pick would be assaulted by the Democrat lie machine and echoed in the establishment media. They picked a candidate, Paul Ryan, who could take the Democrats and the media head on and substantively address the issues. But what were the issues over which Republicans were willing to make battle? They were willing to fight over fiscal issues. They are seldom willing to fight over social issues.

Too many of them run and hide, for example, on abortion. This kerfuffle is really about abortion and it is a fight for which the Republican establishment really has no stomach. If the Republican Party will not fight for the life of unborn innocents, what is the point of fighting to protect upper-class tax brackets?

This dilemma which, make no mistake, is a moral dilemma, is therefore one which the Republican Party must address and solve. But let us also recognize that we are in this moral dilemma precisely because we strive to be a moral party. The Democrats are free of this dilemma because they are not. They are a ruthlessly disciplined cult which, typical of a cult, brooks no "unauthorized" thinking much less dissent. Because Soros has taken the reins of communication and finance so completely in his hands, the Democrat party has become a Soviet with all the implications that contains.

Every Democrat officeholder knows his fate if he departs from the party line. Every Democrat knows that he is likely to be rewarded in his political life or in his post officeholding life by the Democrat machine if he stays in line. Every Democrat officeholder knows it is better for his career to be defeated at the polls them to depart from party orthodoxy. The Democrat party can command this "loyalty" because it controls finances and it controls the media. But it controls one thing more, as a cult it controls the thinking processes of its members.

We as conservatives abhor everything we see the Democrat party doing to itself and then, by extension, to our beloved nation and precious liberties. The solution which we conservatives find to the dilemma the Todd Akin affair has highlighted must be one which is congruent with our notions of personal liberty and individual sovereignty.

So far, our behavior does not inspire confidence that we are feeling our way to such a solution.

[pistolpackinpapa]

Akin has tamed them once again. Akin has provided young people with some important lessons in leadership.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

OMG! That would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic. Now, Tau Food, please......lay.....down.....the....crack....pipe.

[jpsb]

It did not hear a "gaffe" at all. I hear a man clumsily present the pro-life position on abortion in the case of rape. The GOP is still pro-life correct?

The attacks on Akins' are thinly veiled attacks on pro-life people. It obvious the GOP under Romney wants to move to a more pro-choice position. And is make an example of Akin.

[pistolpackinpapa]

My Post #19 addresses your questions and concerns; check it out.

[pistolpackinpapa]

Rasmussen - In Missouri Obama 47 Romney 46.

THANK YOU TODD AKIN!

[nathanbedford]

With respect I think you are conflating the obligations of Todd Akin as a empty headed but innocent gaffer with the obligations of Todd Akin as the victim of an unmitigated bombardment of friendly fire from the Republican establishment.

When Akin made the gaffe, it was not so egregious as to require withdrawing from the race absence the piling on by the Republican establishment. At least that is the position taken by Akin's defenders. They have a point.

The counterpoint, of course, is that it was Akin who put the Republican Party in an untenable position by his own negligence (which is to be distinguished from malevolence) and therefore it is quite proper to demand that he withdraw. The Republican Party is not obligated to assume the risks of his negligence.

My point is that the reaction of the Republican establishment was certainly not thought through, it was reactive rather than considered. The issue of the egregiousness of the gaffe is not so clear until one is buffeted by the establishment's reaction. The gaffe was not weighed against the intimidation factor which will repeat time and time again.

How many gaffes will Romney make between now and the election? Will we defend him? Of course!

I am asking not for judgments about Todd Akin's moral character in refusing to exceed to the establishment demands, but for a workable moral principle upon which the Republican Party should rely on occasions like this.

I see no groping towards such an ideal and this is not merely a theoretical consideration. We are bombarded by the media in every election cycle on trumped up gaffes and the Republican Party should have its position formulated in advance.

[corkoman]

Lieutenant General Bedford,

first a thank you for making the effort to describe the habit and consequences of republicans that form a circular firing squad to dismiss one of their ranks that misspeak.

I agree that should the goon squad have at least held their fire as there is indeed the possibility that Akins could have endured this mess and won this senate race.

Not to excuse or justify this habit, but you employ a premise that is tenuous and I will describe: you argue that the proper response to a gaffe such as this is with explanation and sound reasoning. Unfortunately, most, at least a majority of women voters are not rational. They prefer the handsome, slick talkin', soaring oratory, State Provider kind of candidate. As Mediscare is an effective tool on the elderly so is Womens Whatever is to most women. Republicans are held to a higher set of standards than Gimmidats who enjoy a fawning press. My point here is that Akins should have had memorized pat responses to these utterly predictable questions but yet it seems to me he was Winging It and failed. This is perhaps the reason he is being treated in such a manner. It is his judgement that is at issue not his principles.

Republicans must run against the Santa Claus party and this requires discipline and focus. Akins demonstrated neither in this unfortunate moment. Ultimately the circular firing squad made things worse and this is a subject that should be part of a more disciplined party future.

[stop_fascism]

So, you agree that a woman’s body automatically shuts down in the case of rape?

[stop_fascism]

Pundits don’t have that much power. All they did was recognize that Akin had committed political suicide.

[nathanbedford]

I think we are largely in accord, please see my post number 11.

[jpsb]

Akins’ was trying to differentiate between "she says rape" and violent sexual intercourse without consent. The use of the word legitimate was perfectly correct, abate foolish.

The man is 65 and the term rape has been hijacked by feminists. These days just about everything is "rape". But back in the day rape was a man violently forcing himself upon a woman without her consent. That was what Akins' was talking about and everyone knows that.

I am surprised Sarah is piling on to, she of all people should know better.

[nathanbedford]

I take it you do not believe in the power of media bias running in favor of the Democrats?

[mrsmith]

The point, or a point, of the post is that Akin would be in better shape if the Republican criticism had been wiser.

Akin looks now like he’ll lose by about 5%, it’s arguable that without the Republican firestorm against him personally (not just his retracted remarks) his chances would be about even instead.

With Akin’s quick retraction they could easily condemn the remarks without attacking him.
Which would have been the practical thing to do.
It’s what Dems would do in any case and what Republicans would do on other issues.
Republicans reacted extremely instead of intelligently because this is a social issue or ‘women’s issue’.

[jpsb]

I would imagine in some cases yes. However that is not what Akins’ said. He said doctors have told him that pregnancy from rape was rare, since a woman kinda shuts down as a natural defense. Do you doubt that some doctors believe that? And might have even told Akins’ that? It might even be true.

[iopscusa]

Excellent commentary NB! You have put my thoughts about the Rotten Republican attack on Akin into words. This is a Political Party that is not honorable in any way and with Romney and Co. installed it will only get worse.

[Dr. Sivana]

Well worded. I think the state’s rules about timing for a withdrawal forced some of the overdrive. What those who went so hard, so loud, so fast didn’t anticipate is that Akin would not squish. Whatever anyone thinks his motivation is, he has won the primary and they will have to deal with it the way we have to decide how to deal with Romney representing the would-be conservative party.

I think Akin should have withdrawn, but he’s not. Those who wanted him to withdraw should ahve approached him differently. Too late now.

Let’s make the best of it. There are heads that should be on pikes. His is not one of them.

[Lazamataz]

Glad you contributed to the Freeper Editorial section, Nathan!

That said, the heat has already been applied, and the situation is as it is. Akin must look realistically at the lay of the land -- fair or not -- and promptly withdraw.

Such a move would show he is not self-centered and self-seeking, and would inure to his benefit in the long run.

[Prov3456]

IMO = the "friendly fire" did it.

Republicans have a knack for circular firing squads. Then we wonder why Dems win. It's time to look in the mirror and shut up, IMO.

I am furious over the whole mess!

[iopscusa]

Also this Akin blowup has made it clear to me that Conservatives need better ‘Talkers’, some that will be herded by group thinking and MSM tropes like Rush, Coulter, Hannity, the FOX droids and most other faux Con Talkers/Thinkers have been. These folks are hopelessly out of touch with the grass root issues and mostly just running cover for Retched Republicans, Boehner, Romney, Bush, etc. We can and must do better.

[mrsmith]

The person running for his old seat gives a perfct example of intelligent criticism of his remarks:
“Todd Akin’s comments about rape were wrong and indefensible. Todd has apologized and understands he was wrong in what he said.”

[so_real]

The personal fate of Todd Akin is not very relevant in itself except as a reflects on the Republican Party and its effect in intimidating potential candidates away from running for office and away from speaking out on social issues.

Agreed. It is by no coincidence that Akin's grass roots fundraising campaign these last couple days (as he's been cut off financially by the GOP) has been labeled the "Help Todd Fight Against the Party Bosses" campaign. I do hope the Republican Party comes back around and quits trying to make war with its conservative base. But my hopes seem not yet to be painted in reality.