Replies

He's not mentally deficient. He just read this article from 1999:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2921696/posts

Are you boycotting Rush Limbaugh because he played into the hands of Democrats with the "slut" comment? Democrats will play whatever hand they want anytime they want. We conservatives are so much better on the issues that we don't need to be afraid of them. And I will never change my principles and policies on moral beliefs just to get votes.

And I believe voters will come back to Akin, assuming he doesn't have his resources cut off. I believe the voters of Missouri are decent people who don't want to crucify a guy for passing on some information that may have been incorrect, or used an incorrect word for something.

I never called for Democrats to boot anyone out of their party. I think it should be up to the voters whether they keep a guy like Byrd, Rangall, or Wiener. Their offenses are minor compared to what all of the Democrats vote for every day anyway, so I'm not going to feign outrage over them when I'm always more outraged than that already over liberal policies.

He's not mentally deficient. He just read this article from 1999:

Did he mention that? I would caution you to be very leery of believing everything you hear physicians present. This one may be right. He may not be right.

Are you boycotting Rush Limbaugh because he played into the hands of Democrats with the "slut" comment? Democrats will play whatever hand they want anytime they want.

Did Rush Limbaugh use a term "Legitmate Rape" as opposed to "non-Legitimate Rape" to categorize women's reports of the act in separate ways? No. He used an improper term and was taken to task for it. At the time I thought of it as overkill. I also thought it was inappropriate.

He didn't make the claim that women don't get pregnant from forcible rape.

We conservatives are so much better on the issues that we don't need to be afraid of them.

I agree.

And I will never change my principles and policies on moral beliefs just to get votes.

Who suggested you should? If a guy destroys his credibility, that has nothing to do with his overal politics. It has nothing to do with your set of values.

And I believe voters will come back to Akin, assuming he doesn't have his resources cut off. I believe the voters of Missouri are decent people who don't want to crucify a guy for passing on some information that may have been incorrect, or used an incorrect word for something.

I don't come up with a different set of rules for the poeple I would generally support. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

I never called for Democrats to boot anyone out of their party.

My values system does require me to make a judgement call on former members of the KKK, and political parties that still allow them positions of power that affect laws and legislation that is drafted today. The values of the KKK are that repulsive..

I think it should be up to the voters whether they keep a guy like Byrd, Rangall, or Wiener.

Okay, well if you want to go on the record that you wouldn't object if the voters of your state only picked former or current KKK members for elected office, that's okay with me. I don't think you actually believe that, BTW.

Their offenses are minor compared to what all of the Democrats vote for every day anyway, so I'm not going to feign outrage over them when I'm always more outraged than that already over liberal policies.

Look, I understand what you're trying to say, but downplaying what the KKK was inolved in isn't right, and you should know and admit to that.