NRSC Executive Director had this to say: "As with every Republican Senate candidate, we hope Todd Akin wins in November, and we will continue to monitor this race closely in the days ahead.”
Other prominent Republicans went even further. Former Republican presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are backing Akin. Gingrich even held a fundraiser for Akin earlier this week. Akin also received the backing of Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-SC) Senate Conservatives Fund, an influential, well-funded group that has backed the GOP’s most extreme Senate candidates over the past two election cycles.NRSC words were code for if it looks like Akin can win, we will put money in the race. Why any woman would vote for Aiken is beyond me. I was insulted the day he wanted to redefine rape and was elected as the MO GOP candidate -- didn't even think it was a possibility that this man could be the nominee. Then all these Republicans went after him for his rape comments which also reflected what Ryan had said in the past about the definition of rape which made me do the research to discover the 3rd bill (HR 3) submitted after the GOP took over in January 2011 had to do with abortion, birth control, etc. Those white guys sure didn't waste much time. You may ask why I keep saying white guys, but it is because there are a lack of women Republican Senators and when Kay Bailey and Olympia Snowe retire at the end of this session, we will be down to Susan Collins (R-ME), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH). Even Lisa Murkowski had to win a write-in for Senate in AK after the Tea Party picked Joe Wilson another bad candidate.
Republicans in MO instead of electing Sarah Steelman in the primary who would have been a much better candidate and probably won against Claire McCaskill, chose to elect Akin by a slim margin. IMHO Sarah Palin should have stayed out of that race but that is just me -- know too many Republicans in MO that don't like her. McCaskill actually pulled a fast one on the GOP in MO by running an ad against Akin which made some Republicans fall for it and say if she didn't want to run against Akin, then I am voting for him. The fact is that Akin was an easier candidate to beat with his hard right positions on social issues than Steelman. IMHO Steelman would be ahead in the race instead of Akin being behind.
If the GOP thinks pouring money into the race is going to affect the votes of most women they don't have a clue about how mad Akin's comments made all women America to think that he considered himself to be so intelligent about rape that he could say if a woman willed herself not to get pregnant during a rape, she wouldn't. What kind of neanderthal thinking is that? That man does not belong in the Senate. Because of the white males of the GOP supporting Akin, we stand to lose other races where women are running because women across this Country don't want the GOP in charge of the Senate if they are willing to support someone like Akin for the Senate. You would have Akin in the Senate and Ryan in the House both pushing the definition of rape and personhood. No Thanks!
By ThinkProgress War Room on Sep 26, 2012 at 5:28 pm
Republicans Signal New Support for Disgraced Candidate
When Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) made his infamous observation that “legitimate rape” rarely produces pregnancy because “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” his fellow Republicans couldn’t run away fast enough. One after another they denounced Akin — despite the fact that many of them shared his sentiments on the issue if not his extremely poor choice of words. In fact, Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan even teamed up with Akin and other House Republicans in an ill-fated effort to redefine rape. Ryan also worked with Akin on a “personhood” measure that would outlaw abortion in all circumstances and ban common forms of birth control and in vitro fertilization.
The most immediate impact of the Republican effort to distance themselves from Akin (and to try to force him to quit the race) came in the form of declarations from GOP outside spending groups that they would abandon Akin’s campaign and pull their money out of Missouri. For the most part, these groups have kept their word and Sen. Claire McCaskill has surged ahead in the polls.
Now things have changed.
Yesterday was the last day that Akin could pull out of the race and, as promised, he did not do so. So with their chances of taking the Senate looking more and more unlikely by the day, it appears Republicans don’t think Akin and his outrageously offensive comments are so bad after all.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee, the official campaign arm of Senate Republicans, opened the door to getting back into the race on Akin’s behalf:
“There is no question that for Missourians who believe we need to stop the reckless Washington spending, rein-in the role of government in people’s lives, and finally focus on growing jobs in this country, that Todd Akin is a far more preferable candidate than liberal Sen. Claire McCaskill,” NRSC executive director Rob Jesmer said. “As with every Republican Senate candidate, we hope Todd Akin wins in November, and we will continue to monitor this race closely in the days ahead.”
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO), who had earlier called on Akin to quit the race, also voiced his support for Akin:
Congressman Akin and I don’t agree on everything, but he and I agree the Senate majority must change. From Governor Romney to the county courthouse, I’ll be working for the Republican ticket in Missouri, and that includes Todd Akin.(snip)
BOTTOM LINE: The GOP’s apparent re-embrace of Todd Akin tells us what we knew all along: Republicans didn’t really object to Akin’s comments about “legitimate rape,” they just found them to be politically inconvenient. Despite their initial attempt to distance themselves from Akin, it appears that Republicans are going to have to take responsibility for his outrageous comments about women and their bodies.A lot of the attacks on Claire McCaskill by Republicans have not made much sense but found this gem about her career in the Senate and may explain why Republicans donors don't want her back especially the ones doing Government contracting with the Defense Department:
In November 2006, Claire became the first woman elected to the U.S. Senate from Missouri, vowing to bring Harry Truman's no-nonsense style of accountability back to Washington, D.C. It only seemed fitting that her place in the Senate chamber is a desk shared by none other than Sen. Truman himself. She was named as one of the select senators to sit on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, formerly known as the Truman Committee. In fact, one of Claire’s first major bills to pass in the Senate established a modern day Truman Committee called the Wartime Contracting Commission, charged with investigating wasteful, fraudulent and abusive contracts in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In addition to working to establish a committee to examine wartime contracting, in 2009 Claire was named chairman of a new subcommittee that investigates contracting abuses throughout the federal government. The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight strives to root out government waste by focusing on contracts and the means by which the federal government provides accountability to those contracts.
Claire currently sits on four Senate Committees, including Armed Services, Commerce, HSGAC and Aging. From those committees, she’s taken on: accountability and transparency, earmark reform, increased independence for Inspectors General (IG) that act as federal auditors, credit card regulations, security improvements to foreign repair stations that service our domestic aircraft, reforms to the reverse mortgage industry, consumer protections, and full benefits and resources for our brave veterans and wounded active service members.McCaskill was the State Auditor of MO before she took on the sitting Democrat Governor and the Democrat establishment to win the primary in 2006 and defeat the Republican Senator Jim Talent (now works for Romney) in the general election in a close race. You want someone who will handle fraud, waste, and abuse, elect a State Auditor. I just read where Claire McCaskill stands on Issues and I am having a hard time understanding why the Republicans are calling her a liberal.
Here are a few issues with her stance:
With more than 12 million illegal immigrants already residing within the U.S. and an additional 500,000 crossing our borders each year, it's clear our current immigration system is broken and the status quo is unacceptable. America is a nation founded by immigrants, but it's also a nation founded upon the rule of law, and Claire believes it is imperative we respect both of these traditions.
As a member of both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee (HSGAC), Claire believes in a cohesive and thoughtful approach to the security of our nation and supporting the mission of our men and women in uniform. Now more than ever, Claire believes American leadership in the world is critical to helping ensure peace, democracy and human rights. This is particularly true in the face of complex challenges in fighting terrorism and transnational threats, ensuring success in Iraq and Afghanistan and crafting a strong, forward-leaning foreign policy.
As the daughter of a World War II veteran, Claire believes America has a moral responsibility to keep its promises to those who have sacrificed to protect our country. While much remains to be done to ensure that all those who have served receive the benefits and care they have earned, since arriving in Washington, D.C. Claire has championed a number of measures to improve quality of life for America's military heroes.
Claire McCaskill deserves to be reelected to the US Senate from MO to carry on her work with fraud, waste, and abuse while being willing to work across the aisle. We need more women in the Senate not fewer IMHO!