I thoughtSharron Angle’s “made what was really a lemon situation into lemonade” was about as batshit insane as wingnuttery could get when it came to denying a woman’s right to choose…butIndiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock saw her batshittery and raised her one “gift from God,” as you’ve probably read or seen.
And then, of course, there was thenon-apology expression of regret that his words were “misinterpreted.” But…Mourdock’s position — aside form being ignorant and cruel beyond belief — are pretty much mainstream Redumblican these days.Mitt Romney, who, in typically cloddish style, endorsed and recently recorded a television commercial for Mourdock, is allegedly “moderate” by party standards in “allowing” rape and incest exceptions…if that can even be considerd moderate…but the party itself has gone off the cliff. When it comes to choice, they’re more than willing to make government as big and intrusive as it can get.
Then, as we all know, once the child is born, they couldn’t care any less about “sanctity of life.” Hell, they demand we spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on stuff designed to kill them.
5 thoughts on ““That Gift From God””
Those cancer cells growing in Mourdock’s brain are a “gift from God”, and it would be wrong to try and kill them.
Of course, the question of “evil” is one that has appeared in almost any religion and appears in the greatest philosophers.
So how come when the politicians bring it up, they speak in the most simplistic understanding possible? To make it worse, when they are spewing their pablum, they act as if they were in possession of some heretofore unknown depth of understanding.
Shouldn’t we want the wisest people as our representatives?
Likewise, one of the traditional campaign slogans was that we want moral people (has anyone else noticed that in the last decade this has fallen by the wayside?). Shouldn’t that be people whose morality is more developed than the average kindergartener?
Of course, some of the characteristics of psychopaths include:
*) Superficial Understanding – Often attributed to a lack of true love / zeal to really delve into the topic. See the platitudes of the politicians. See Mitt’s in-depth understanding of foreign policy. See the lack of a coherrent sanctity of life extending beyond the womb.
*) Lack of empathy. See post on removing welfare benefits from mothers from A today. See lack of coherrent sanctity of life extending beyond the womb.
*) Superficial Charm – Mitt’s smile with his mouth but expressionless eyes. Botox or put-on charm?
*) Seeing others as a means to an end. See Mitt’s telling donors how to threaten employees with firings should Obama win.
You’re onto something MapleStreet — was “watching” the last debate from the Crack Van, but seeing some video “highlight” clips of Matt really disturbed me. It was the first time I really was able to look at his face and expressions from a reasonably close camera angle: the condescending expression of someone who’s never faced real any genuine personal or financial crises, but who will happily sign pink slips by the gross, or tell a seriously ill (Mormon) woman she can’t choose abortion even if that’s a doctor’s recommendation.
Mitt makes Shrub look, if not almost principled, at least almost human.
unless the govt is gonna pony up ALL THE COSTS OF SAID RAPE BABIES, the GOP can go to hell.
Comments are closed.