Steve King says so long to the GOP controlled House

Why? Because this is not just a dumb statement made by one idiot Missouri who had a bad day – contrary to what the GOP wants you to believe – but a thought of a sizable portion of the fringe right of the GOP. Ryan and Akin attempted to pass a bill aimed at redefining rape to include a bipartite understanding of forcible rape. Look, I don’t want to issue unfounded statements, but look to Utah for this idea of forcible rape.

So, Steve King today, GOP Rep from Iowa who co-sponsored the bill with Akin and Ryan said this:

King told an Iowa reporter he’s never heard of a child getting pregnant from statutory rape or incest.

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

Wow…

Just think… this dynamic trio will be just a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

You Might Also Like

9 Replies to “Steve King says so long to the GOP controlled House”

  1. “King told an Iowa reporter he’s never heard of a child getting pregnant from statutory rape or incest.”

    Mr. Fritzl got his daughter pregnant seven times. Odd that King never heard of that. It was in the news.

  2. “… this dynamic trio will be just a heartbeat away from the Presidency.”
    But now at the Precidency you have someone who denies rights, personhood and the same definition of ‘human being’ to children born alive before nine months as for the President only child delivered to term are proper person (I could say ‘legitimate person’). The same president recently opposed to a ban on abortion for sex selection (the choise of the sex, mostly eliminating females, according to the President is a ‘medical decision’).
    But it seems that this does not upset you.

    1. It does upset me, actually – however, some of your facts of badly interpreted opinions. For instance, the President is against sex selection, but the bill went beyond that.

      1. Ok, maybe I missed it: could you remember me when Obama said ‘I’m against sex selection’?
        And could you explain why the bill went beyond?

        1. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/legislation-about-gender-selection-and-abortion-todays-q-for-os-wh-5302012/

          “The Administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but the end result of this legislation would be to subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision. The government should not intrude in medical decisions or private family matters in this way.”
          -Jake Tapper

          1. ok… thanks I did not missed Obama speaking about forced abortions motivated by gender,race,sex and color in his country.
            He did not speak about this and as far as I know the Administration has not presented a bill on this topic (a law protecting women without threatening the doctors as in the UK) so the motivation given to stop the Republican bill is only an excuse and actually it seems that the Administration is worried most for the doctors.
            For the Administration ( Smith is very clear) forced abortions motivated by gender,race,sex and color are a ‘private family matter’ and they will never present a law about this.

          2. Republican’s bill has a rule of construction stating: “Nothing in
            this Act shall be construed to require that a healthcare provider has an affirmative duty to inquire as to the motivation for the abortion”.
            So the bill applies only to doctors who knowingly act.
            Nobody is asking to read in the patient’s mind (as Smith said).
            If the real motivation for the Administration was that they are worried about doctors now it can be easily proved.
            And, again, if they can not stand the Republican bill they can submit their own bill.
            We will see…

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.