Right Blogosphere Steps on Own Dick Again

…but at least this time they caught themselves screwing the pooch after a number of people, our Imperial Self included, had helpfully pointed it out to them.

The liberal smear machine, eager to score some more points on the Akin fuckup, tried to corner Rep. Steve King on the issue as well, to which he answered:

King supports the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.” It would ban Federal funding of abortions except in cases of forcible rape. Right now, Medicaid also covers abortions for victims of statutory rape or incest – for example, a 12 year old who gets pregnant.

Congressman King says he’s not aware of any young victims like that.

“Well I just haven’t heard of that being a circumstance that’s been brought to me in any personal way, and I’d be open to discussion about that subject matter,” he said.

Twitter immediately exploded in outrageously outraged outrage from the usual liberal fascist fuckwads, no surprise there, but also with the “right” piling on as well. Obviously they weren’t quite sure that one sacrifice to the Mighty Liberal Fascist Meme God would be enough. Even Twitchy went all in on it. “Burn him, burn him, he says that statutory rape and incest doesn’t exist!”

Never mind that he never said any such thing. What he did say, as anybody with the reading comprehension skills of a three-year-old can see, is that he didn’t personally know of any examples.

Similarly, His Imperial Majesty if asked would have to state that he doesn’t personally know anybody who died in a Nazi concentration camp, but if anybody wants to extrapolate that to mean that we don’t believe the Holocaust ever happened, then please do so. To our face. And be sure that your affairs are in order first, because you’ll be going home in a plastic bag.

In all fairness, Twitchy later corrected their error, stating that when viewed “in context”, they realized that he didn’t say what they’d initially claimed that he said. “In context” apparently meaning “actually reading their own fucking quote”, because that’s what we put up there earlier in the post. Seriously. Is it too much to ask for those on “our” side to actually fucking read their own stuff before they jump to conclusions?

Obviously it is. The Angry Liberal Meme Gods must be appeased at all costs! They’ll like us better that way, and that is the only way to victory!

We say it again: It’s bloody hard to win a war if you have to worry about your “own” side constantly bringing in FFEs on your position.

Also, we’re getting a bit sick and tired of being told that those icky “SoCon” values that some of us on the right hold dear, such as our opposition to abortion and gay marriage, are perfectly OK as long as we shut up about them in public. It’s fine for us to “use” them to corral in our fellow “SoCons”, as long as we don’t “hurt the cause” by actually believing in them.

WE’RE not trying to force them down anybody’s throat, so would it be too much to ask of our “allies” to not tell us to shut up in public about them? “Big Tent?” Fuck you. We’re only welcome in your “pragmatic” “Big Tent” as long as we keep our values to ourselves, but our votes are most welcome. Thanks a fucking pants-load and DO fuck off if you don’t mind terribly. Is it any wonder that us “horrible SoCons” view the so-called GOP Big Tent with increasing suspicion?

We don’t think so.

Thatisall.

22 comments

  1. 1
    LC Jackboot IC/A growls and barks:

    Is it any wonder that us “horrible SoCons” view the so-called GOP Big Tent with increasing suspicion?

    Suspicious? Indeed, so much that win or lose it’s coming down sometime say mid-November. Lest we continue to suffer the Boehners and McNadless’s of the world.

    …..mheh…
    LC Jackboot IC/A recently posted..Best. Photo. Ever.My Profile

  2. 2

    WE’RE not trying to force them down anybody’s throat, so would it be too much to ask of our “allies” to not tell us to shut up in public about them? “Big Tent?” Fuck you. We’re only welcome in your “pragmatic” “Big Tent” as long as we keep our values to ourselves, but our votes are most welcome. Thanks a fucking pants-load and DO fuck off if you don’t mind terribly. Is it any wonder that us “horrible SoCons” view the so-called GOP Big Tent with increasing suspicion?

    Again, I say, my darling brother, that if every SoCon was as commonsense as you, I doubt anyone but the craziest of leftards would have a problem.

    The problem, as I see it is, those with conservative values trying to use government to impose those values on others by force. They seem to be very keen on getting the government out of the people’s lives, EXCEPT when it comes to defining a relationship between consenting adults. Then, all bets are off and FUCK! We have to have government interference so vast, that we need a constitutional amendment defining what has traditionally been either a private religious thing or a private relationship thing! And they don’t see the hypocrisy!

    I have no problem with people who oppose abortion. I have no problem with people who oppose gay marriage. Shout it from the rooftops! It is your right after all.

    I do have a problem with the feds funding abortion, because I don’t think the taxpayers should fund ANYONE’S medical choices, especially ones with which they disagree.

    I do have a problem with people screaming for a constitutional amendment defining what is and should be a personal relationship, because it automatically gets politicians involved in our business. If I want to marry my girlfriend, and there’s a church willing to perform the ceremony, that should be fine with all involved! The church will either lose members of its congregation based on said policy or it won’t. It’s called the “free market,” and it works.

    Personally, I’m beginning to realize the consequences of having government involved in marriage. I’ve been living with my awesome boyfriend for two years – not a huge amount of time, but pretty significant. We share expenses, he helps with the kids, and we have a dog together. It is our home. Together. We choose not to get married for many reasons, not the least of which is neither one of us wants the government involved in our relationship. And yet, I can’t put him on my medical or dental insurance without government documentation that we’re “legally” married. And he’s not considered “family,” so should something happen to me, and I wind up in the hospital, he’s treated as a second class citizen. Even though he’s my emergency contact, he’s authorized to get my kids at school in the event of an emergency, and we have a strong, stable relationship. Without that government piece of paper, he’s nothing. If I deploy and die, he won’t even be authorized to get the flag. We choose not to get married. Gays, who have been in stable relationships for decades don’t even have that option. Meanwhile, retards meet, fuck and marry within the span of a few weeks (and yes, I’ve seen it happen to get military benefits), and they get all the “rights” of a spouse. Is that fair? Is that just?

    As Secondmouse so eloquently pointed out in an earlier discussion, we are losing sight of who needs to make the decision. The churches do. The people do. And they need to pay for those decisions without government involvement that ultimately leads to all of us paying for said decisions. And once we allow the government to do so, we are allowing force to rule our lives and losing the definition of the individual as a sovereign being.
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..What the bleeding fuck is “legitimate rape?”My Profile

  3. 3
    Mark12A growls and barks:

    Nikki is spot on. If I want to whack a woman across the ass with my sword or have her jump over a broom and we consider ourselves to be married, that should be between us and the insurance companies. It’s become pretty clear to me that the only reason the gov is involved in marriage is they can fuck with your taxes depending on your legal marriage status.

    Maybe it’s time to pull the entire structure down and start all over again. Unfortunately, the rest of the world won’t leave us alone but it may be inevitable.

  4. 4

    Mark12A says:

    t’s become pretty clear to me that the only reason the gov is involved in marriage is they can fuck with your taxes depending on your legal marriage status.

    BINGO!
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..What the bleeding fuck is “legitimate rape?”My Profile

  5. 5
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    Mark12A @ #:

    It’s become pretty clear to me that the only reason the gov is involved in marriage is they can fuck with your taxes depending on your legal marriage status

    That’s definitely a part of it. But the purpose of power IS power. Governments seek to expand their areas of control because that gives them more power.

  6. 6
    LC TerribleTroy growls and barks:

    Is there a tax benefit to be had upon entering into a marriage contract that isnt outweighed by liabilities? And if there is, why did the incentives come about? What was the govt trying to promote? :em03:

  7. 7
    Slightly to the right of Gingis Khan growls and barks:

    Marriage licenses were invented in Europe, mostly as a way to keep undesirables from marrying up. A big part of the reason they were kept here in America was to keep impressionable white girls from getting tricked into marrying a black fella.

    Like Cube said…. it’s all about power.

  8. 8
    Special Ed growls and barks:

    Sorry to get back on thread, but I have a puzzlement. (And pardon me, I’ve been imbibing in RC*, so I’m a tad verbose. Part of that whole ‘Asperger’s’ thing) In the discussion of abortion on demand, don’t the pro-deathers claim that a fetus is only a part of a woman’s body, and that, as such, neither God nor man, especially the father of said fetus have any say in its future? Don’t they also claim that the onus of carrying the fetus result of a rape is so repulsive that even pro-lifers should desire an abortion to spare the poor victim the burden of bearing the attacker’s child?

    Aren’t those two positions mutually exclusive, or is it just me, someone for whom logic is life itself? http://nicedoggie.net/wp-content/plugins/emotions/images/em03.gif

    If it’s a child, then it’s innocent, and cannot be killed simply to make another person feel better. (Or so I’ve been told, as I’ve said a number of times that if certain persons woke up dead, I’d feel loads better.) If it’s a part of the woman’s body, then its origin is moot.

    Maybe I’m just Special

    Ed

    *Rum and Cola

  9. 9

    Special Ed says:

    If it’s a child, then it’s innocent, and cannot be killed simply to make another person feel better.

    The phrase “carry a child to term” is what is commonly used, regardless of whether or not you believe a zygote or even an embryo is a child. But thank you for reducing the experiences of rape victims to “feeling bad.” I’m sure that “feeling better” is exactly their goal in seeking to terminate a pregnancy. Goodness, I’m glad it’s so fucking easy!
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..Justice Department seeks…My Profile

  10. 10
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    Hinderaker says the “Republicans” i.e. Romney/Ryan, the RNC, the various other candidates shouldn’t be talking about abortion and should stick to hammering the ‘rats on the economy. Fine, I agree with that. But we can talk about it and damn well should. The ‘rats have made a quantum leap in their abortion platform – from “safe and rare” to “convenient and free”. What’s next? In 2014 and beyond will it be “forcible and mandatory”. Will a one child policy be imposed, “at the Secretary’s discretion” (as 0bamacare says far to often) on Amerika? What will be their 2016 platform – Sterilization? Infanticide? Euthanasia? Selective Breeding of Oppressed Minorities? Somebody has to call these sicko pervert America-haters out. Let it be us while the candidates stay on the economic issues.

    BTW, Romney better revise and extend his pledge to issue an Executive Order in the first 100 hours to grant 50 state exemptions to 0bamacare. That alone won’t stop the continued building of the federal apparatus. He must issue an EO to defund every aspect of 0bamacare pending it’s Repeal.

  11. 11
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    What has gone unmentioned, however, in the cacophony of condemnation by Republicans and Democrats, is the implication in Mr. Akin’s comments that rape is not a moral justification for abortion. In that, he is correct: It is not.

    Abortion takes the life of innocent human beings who are the most vulnerable in our society. Abortion is today the most frequently performed medical procedure in the United States. American physicians perform about two abortions every minute of every hour of every day: about 1 million a year since 1973. In my home state of New Jersey, abortion is permitted up to the moment of birth, and the state will even pay for it if the mother meets certain financial criteria.

    How low have we sunk? What are the consequences of this mass slaughter? How did we get here?

    We got here because of the most reprehensible and unconstitutional Supreme Court opinion in the modern era. In a throwback to its infamous Dred Scott decision — in which a pre-Civil War Supreme Court declared that blacks are not persons and hence cannot claim the protections of the Constitution — the court essentially said the same in Roe v. Wade of fetuses in the womb.

    Roe v. Wade has spawned more slaughter than all 20th-century tyrants combined. The consequences of this slaughter are entire lost generations of human beings who were denied by the law the right to live. The economic consequences from which we all suffer today — entitlements too costly to afford and too few wage earners to pay for them — are directly attributable to the absence of population growth.

    Read more: NAPOLITANO: Akin absurdity aside, rape never justifies abortion – Washington Times

  12. 12

    LC Gladiator says:

    is the implication in Mr. Akin’s comments that rape is not a moral justification for abortion. In that, he is correct: It is not.

    That can be argued until the cows come home. However, that wasn’t Akin’s implication at all. His implication (based on questionable pseudo-science) was that since a woman’s body has this magical rejection mechanism that prevents her from getting pregnant from “legitimate” rape, the women who DO get pregnant and claim rape, must be lying. If he truly misspoke, as he claims, he wouldn’t have proceeded to yammer on about how some “doctors” have told him that a woman’s body has a way of rejecting an attacker’s sperm. It’s repugnant.
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..Justice Department seeks…My Profile

  13. 13
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch @ #:

    Nicki…. while I agree with you that the “legitimate” arguement is lame and wrong, You may not be old enough to remember this: ( Im old) In the late 1960s there was a study, PAID for by Planned Parenthood, that concluded that it was UNLIKELY for a woman to be fertilized if her “juices” (read: excitement) was insufficient to provide a “seaway” for the sperm to swim to the egg. Ergo, since a “legitimate rape” was traumatic and not exciting, the juices did not flow and pregnancy was unlikely to occur. Of course the study was discredited later, but it did linger for a few years !
    I believe this is what Akin was erroneously referring to.

  14. 14

    LC Gladiator @ #:

    I know there have been ridiculous “studies” back then on this topic, although I don’t know that one in particular. It was before I was born. However, since then, medical science is just a bit more advanced, and for Akin to spew that kind of nonsense without actually doing research, and essentially blaming the rape victim for LYING about the rape (Gosh! How could a pregnancy happen! Must not have been a “legitimate” rape!) is twisted. And had he actually “misspoken,” he wouldn’t have blathered on about quasi-science that’s equivalent to Michele Bachmann’s idiotic “HPV vaccine causes retardery” conviction.

    Actually, there was a study done a few years ago that actually showed instances of conception and pregnancy HIGHER in rape victims. The reasons weren’t clear, but one hypothesis is that rapists sought out women who were more fertile – the whole rape=power thing. I don’t know.

    Regardless… the pseudo science he was spouting has long been discredited, and yet he insisted on spewing it anyway, because it somehow supported his contention that women don’t get pregnant from rape, and therefore, should be barred from ending the pregnancy, because they’re obviously lying.
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..Justice Department seeks…My Profile

  15. 15
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch says:

    Regardless… the pseudo science he was spouting has long been discredited, and yet he insisted on spewing it anyway, because it somehow supported his contention that women don’t get pregnant from rape, and therefore, should be barred from ending the pregnancy, because they’re obviously lying.

    Theres where we disagree. I really think Akin didnt KNOW any better, and believed out of date, disproven allegations. Hes very pro life, and his point was “Who speaks for the baby?” IMHO

  16. 16

    LC Gladiator says:

    Theres where we disagree. I really think Akin didnt KNOW any better, and believed out of date, disproven allegations. Hes very pro life, and his point was “Who speaks for the baby?” IMHO

    Oh, no. I absolutely agree he didn’t know any better, and didn’t bother to find out. He found information that supported his hypothesis that women can’t get pregnant if the rape was real, and ran with it like a doofus. Yeah, he’s pro-life. And what that caused him to do was spew unscientific falsities to support his ignorant belief that women can’t get pregnant from rape, and are therefore lying about being raped just to kill their kids, because they’re an inconvenience. Which is a load of fucking crap.

    Trust me when I tell you that the termination of a pregnancy is the most horrible choice anyone can ever make! I was offered that option when I was approximately 26 weeks pregnant, because they thought my daughter had serious congenital issues. Don’t think for a moment that I didn’t agonize and cry about it every night! (I wound up keeping the baby, and she died anyway at 32 weeks, but that’s beside the point) But don’t think for a moment that women view their pregnancies as a simple inconvenience. It’s a painful, agonizing, gut-wrenching, horrifying decision that I wouldn’t wish on ANYONE. But in the end, it was MY choice, and I wouldn’t want an ignorant asshat like Akin making that choice for me.
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..Justice Department seeks…My Profile

  17. 17
    Slightly to the right of Gingis Khan growls and barks:

    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch says:

    But don’t think for a moment that women view their pregnancies as a simple inconvenience. It’s a painful, agonizing, gut-wrenching, horrifying decision that I wouldn’t wish on ANYONE. But in the end, it was MY choice, and I wouldn’t want an ignorant asshat like Akin making that choice for me.

    I would amend that to read “women with a hint of moral fiber”

    I think we all agree that when it comes to abortion the default answer should be no. The debate is where do we draw the line on exceptions. Obviously if the life of the mother is at risk it is a no brainer. After an assault…… I would argue that in a real way their life is at risk as well.

    I just don’t want abortion to be used as a convenience.

  18. 18

    And to make things worse, the ignorant fuck is sinking like a rock in the polls, and refuses to unass the AO.

    Doesn’t help that he’s blaming the “liberal media” for is asshattery.

    What a difference one TV interview can make. Embattled Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill has now jumped to a 10-point lead over her Republican challenger, Congressman Todd Akin, in Missouri’s U.S. Senate race. Most Missouri Republicans want Akin to quit the race while most Missouri Democrats want him to stay.

    The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the Show Me State finds McCaskill earning 48% support to Akin’s 38%. Nine percent (9%) like some other candidate in the race, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

    Dude needs to leave. Pronto. He’s embarrassing.
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..Justice Department seeks…My Profile

  19. 19

    Slightly to the right of Gingis Khan says:

    I just don’t want abortion to be used as a convenience.

    Hey, I agree with you. It shouldn’t be used as a form of birth control.

    I just don’t believe an ignorant politician fuck like Akin is someone who should be allowed to make that decision for me.
    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch recently posted..Justice Department seeks…My Profile

  20. 20
    Slightly to the right of Gingis Khan growls and barks:

    LC Nicki the Resident Misanthropic Bitch says:

    I just don’t believe an ignorant politician fuck like Akin is someone who should be allowed to make that decision for me.

    On that we’re in complete agreement.

  21. 21
    LC Sir Rurik, K.o.E. growls and barks:

    I enter this debate blatedly and reluctantly, since I have conflicted feelings … so I will add but two words in one example, which may sway some people. Stanley Ann.

  22. 22
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    Worse still, as a state senator in Illinois, Obama opposed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act and in his defense said something that should put a chill up every mother’s spine:

    There wasn’t any question about what was happening. The abortions were going wrong. The babies weren’t cooperating. They wouldn’t die as planned. Or, as Illinois state senator Barack Obama so touchingly put it, there was “movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead.”

    No, Senator. They wouldn’t go along with the program. They wouldn’t just come out limp and dead.

    They were coming out alive. Born alive. Babies. Vulnerable human beings Obama, in his detached pomposity, might otherwise include among “the least of my brothers.” But of course, an abortion extremist can’t very well be invoking Saint Matthew, can he? So, for Obama, the shunning of these least of our brothers and sisters – millions of them – is somehow not among America’s greatest moral failings.

    But not Barack Obama. As an Illinois state senator, he voted to permit infanticide. And now, running for president, he banks on media adulation to insulate him from his past.

    The record, however, doesn’t lie.

    Infanticide is a bracing word. But in this context, it’s the only word that fits. Obama heard the testimony of a nurse, Jill Stanek. She recounted how she’d spent 45 minutes holding a living baby left to die.