I guess it was only a matter of time until St. Louis’ contribution to the world of punditry, Dana Loesch, would chime in on Rep. Todd Akin’s claims about the biological impossibility of rape victims becoming pregnant (h/t The Turner Report):

Seems to me like Akin was trying to fit medical explanation into a soundbite. Not the best statement, but some are stretching it majorly.

As Randy Turner notes, it wasn’t a soundbite, but an interview with a sympathetic interviewer. Nor my poor benighted Ms. Loesch, is there a credible “medical explanation” behind Akin’s absurd claims. Evidently, Todd isn’t the only one to fall for junk science claims that happen to be ideologically convenient.

Loesch’s outrage about the treatment Akin is receiving is, however,  understandable when you realize that she thinks the belief that rape victims should be forced to carry their rapists child to term is the same as attempting to prohibit the use of infant formula. As Turner notes, among other of her inane efforts to shift attention to the horrors of left-wing policy, she tweeted in response to criticism of Akin (whose facebook page has, incidentally, been deluged with angry comments):

Michael Bloomberg wants to treat moms who use formula as criminals in NYC. What was that about “creepy old men.”

Of course, Loesch is also guilty of hyperbole here since Bloomberg’s proposed regulation of infant formula would not prohibit its use by women unable to breast feed or just determined to bottle feed. While women may be inconvenienced, nobody would be “criminalized.” Is it asking too much that these folks try to be accurate when they’re attempting to trivialize the major faux pas of their dimmer colleagues?