Did you ever read something so outlandish an example of cognitive dissonance that you seriously considered sticking ball point pens in you eyes, just so you wouldn’t have read any more words that come from the brain of yet another Republican politician? In what can only be described as one of the worst cases of lying to one’s self that I have read in a long time, Ms. Nutchison (not a typo), said in a CNN piece she wrote,
“It has been accompanied by claims that the Republican Party is somehow unfriendly to women — which will be a surprise to the thousands of women attending the convention in Tampa, Florida. The assertion is baseless…”
Since my last article on the love that is obviously rampant toward women among the GOP (yes, that was sarcasm), there have been even more examples of buffoonery spewed forth from the maws of some of their more illustrious politicians.
For example, Talking Points memo ran a story about Pennsylvania GOP Senate candidate Tom Smith, saying that getting pregnant from rape is similar to having a baby out of wedlock. TMP quotes part of an interview that Smith gave to Mark Scolforo, with the Associated Press,
MARK: How would you tell a daughter or a granddaughter who, God forbid, would be the victim of a rape, to keep the child against her own will? Do you have a way to explain that?
SMITH: I lived something similar to that with my own family. She chose life, and I commend her for that. She knew my views. But, fortunately for me, I didn’t have to.. she chose they way I thought. No don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t rape.
SCOLFORO: Similar how?
SMITH: Uh, having a baby out of wedlock.
SCOLFORO: That’s similar to rape?
SMITH: No, no, no, but… put yourself in a father’s situation, yes. It is similar. But, back to the original, I’m pro-life, period.
If you had the intestinal fortitude to watch the opening night of the GOP convention yesterday, you probably have a mindful to add to this. I didn’t watch. I couldn’t. I wasn’t even going to try. Judging from this mornings news feeds, I made the right choice. Especially considering TPM’s story about how Ron Paul supporters, “staged a loud and bitter revolt at the Republican convention Tuesday, undercutting what GOP officials hoped would be a unifying moment as they officially made Mitt Romney their nominee.”
How many of you reading this are familiar with House Resolution 3? That’s the bill that Akin sponsored, and that more than 200 Republican members of Congress joined with him as co-sponsors. This wonderfully compassionate piece of legislation had language restricting the exception for federally funded abortions to “an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest.”
You get that? Forcible rape. Forcible. Talk about your redundancies. What the hell is non-forcible rape? Apparently, these ass clowns are under the impression it only counts (for Federal funding) if the rape is like what you see on TV or in the movies where there’s a lot of screaming and the victim is pinned down only after fighting and clawing and there’s a lot of blood and it’s in a back alley in the dark and there’s rain and steam and dumpsters and the rapist is always some large, ugly guy with ratty clothes and rotten teeth and, well, all rapisty looking.
What the hell is wrong with these people? Rape is like having a child out of wedlock? Women can sometimes not be able to tell if it was really a rape? Comparing the ownership of a spare tire with the need for a woman to always be prepared for rape? I can go on and on, and I have previously and you’ve read these stories everywhere. But what do I know? I’m just another bleeding heart.
It seems that these people have little or no comprehension that a rapist can be anyone. The next door neighbor that’s lived there for decades and was always friendly to the dog, or that nice looking WASPY guy from the grocery store, or some suave and savvy type in a club with a three-dollar pill, or another woman, or another man, or a police officer, a doctor, a farm worker, a spouse, a lover, a friend, or anyone else, for that matter. They also lack the ability to understand that a rape is still a rape whether or not the victim fights back, becomes pregnant or was even initially consenting. They are fucking clueless.
Bear With Me For Number Three…
LZ Granderson, at CNN, wrote a great piece about the Republican Party and their attempt to distance themselves from their own people. Many of the examples he used were the same ones that I used in my article last week, as well as a lot of others. But a couple things he said stood out. Like,
The truth is the “legitimate rape” comment made by U.S. Rep. Todd Akin — as in pregnancy from “legitimate rape” is rare — is not a GOP anomaly but rather another disturbing glimpse into the viewpoint too many social conservatives have about women’s health and reproductive rights.
Former presidential hopeful Rick Santorum suggested doctors who perform an abortion on a woman who becomes pregnant from an attack should be thrown in jail and this year suggested rape victims who become pregnant from an attack should be forced to keep the baby and “make the best out of a bad situation.” And we’re to believe Akin is just a one-off. Please.
He also pointed out that at a Personhood USA town hall meeting last December, Santorum, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry all supported working to outlaw all abortions, without any exceptions. Given that, and the official approval yesterday of the abortion ban by the GOP (human life amendment to the US Constitution), makes it a given that if we end up with a Republican Congress, a total and complete ban on all abortions would be a no-brainer, as would a constitutional ban on same sex marriage, which is a whole other can of worms. In fact, the whole document is rancid. But enough digressions.
Now, Back To Nutchison…
What do you call someone who compromises the principles of human dignity and integrity? Reprobate is a good word. There are others, but I will leave those to you, dear readers. Has Hutchinson sold out or has she been adversely effected by the ingredients of a fruity, sugary drink that is often served in large pitchers that routinely crash through brick walls? Is she a hypocrite, or delusional? It’s hard to tell, really. I would like to think she just sold out, but there are enough religiously batshit crazy people in the GOP with enough completely insane points of view to make it quite obvious that many of them are unfit to hold any office outside the walls of your average fundamentalist church.
Even with all the comments that have been made which reveal an overall lack of understanding about rape, utterly horrifying points of view regarding women’s heath and reproductive issues and an extremely obvious disregard for women in general, Hutchinson still insists that hundreds of anti-women comments made by her party associates are mere distractions. To add insult to injury, she then gives little more than a cursory acknowledgement that women’s issues are kinda sorta important, or maybe exist, then sails right into waters that are more easily navigated by the GOP. Financial ones.
She says that she is a Republican because,
“I believe that the best opportunities for women — and men, and children — come from a thriving economy that encourages entrepreneurship and promotes business development to create jobs and financial security. In the dismal fiscal state we’re in, I think that is what is most important to women, and I consider the economy to be a women’s issue.”
Wait, what? The economy is more important to the average woman than their own health? Than their reproductive systems? Than their personal safety? Really, that’s what she’s going with? How about it, ladies? Is having more money in the bank worth the price of not having control of your health, your uterus or getting called out on whether the rape committed is legitimate or not, or whether or not you even know what the fuck a rape actually is? Please, comment…
Apparently, according to Nutchison, these issues are “traditional.” Not sure what that even means, but it sounds completely, well, Republican. Apparently modern or non-traditional women don’t count. Just as well, because all those awesome strides that have been made in the name of all women would not have been possible without the Republican party. Yes, she said that,
“But even if we look to the more traditional women’s issues, as a Republican, I have worked on them my entire career. None of it could have been achieved without the support of my party.”
Now, here’s the problem. According to her own words (and I did verify this), she authored some legislation back in 1975 that guaranteed protections for rape victims, including,
“limiting invasive personal questions that had been part of a ‘blame the victim’ culture and redefining consent.”
So, Senator Hutchison, I have some questions for you:
- Why are you blowing off all those batshit crazy rape comments as merely distracting?
- How come you are not screaming in their faces, screaming rants about nerve and gall and making the whole party look bad and systematically undoing all the wonderful stuff the GOP has done for women in the past?
- How come you are not going from state to state, screaming at your fellow Republicans when they start talking about probing vaginas?
- Why are you not doing something about the thirty-plus states that allow a rapist to have custody and visitation rights of the children that were the product of their violence?
- You talk about a co-sponsoring the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program and joining a bi-partisan opposition of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force’s recommendation that women under 50 forgo breast cancer screening. But, why are you not crying out about the utter ridiculousness that your counterparts are spewing forth about a link between abortion and breast cancer; commentary that is disingenuous and only perpetrates more lies to support defunding Planned Parenthood – an organization that has done innumerable good in women’s preventative health?
- You tout that during the debate on reauthorizing of the Violence Against Women Act, you offered an amendment to enact harsher penalties for violent sexual offenses and the backlog of close to half a million untested sexual-assault kits. Why, then, are you indifferent to your fellow Republican’s comments about legitimacy of rape and effort to exclude all but one particularly egregious form of rape as deserving of the benefit of state-sponsored medical care belies your back-patting?
I think these are perfectly valid questions, but I won’t be holding my breath for an answer. In the mean time, I’ll continue to monitor the news and keep the ball point pens handy…