Just heard Todd Akin on KWMU’s St. Louis on the Air (
there’ll probably be a podcast available soon transcript and audio availale here). Guess what? Akin thinks it’s okay that he compared McCaskill to a dog – everybody, he says, knew what he meant. Indeed.
Akin also said that McCasill’s folks are trying to make an issue out of the questionable comparison because Claire doesn’t want to address her record. Really? I seem to remember lots about McCaskill’s legislative record and her positions from just the last debate alone. She may be lots of things, but evasive isn’t one of them.
Same can’t be said about the new and improved Todd Akin. I also know lots about Akin’s positions – but if this interview were all I had to go by, I’m not so sure that I’d have the correct takeaway. For the most part, Akin’s carefully limited statements showed that somebody’s been coaching him about how to pivot and avoid answering when it comes to issues that might be off-putting to a majority of folks.
Legitmate rape? Akin responds with a laundry list of bizarre but fairly standard GOP pronouncements on the economy.
Gay Marriage? Women’s rights? Biblical inerrancy? Diversions, he declares about all the issues that have driven his public persona over the years. We get the standard response: GOP-style economic freedom trumps civil liberties issues like these. Baby’s been learning from the big boys. We hear the same thing from Romney/Ryan. For instance, when asked specifically whether non-evangelicals should be threatened by efforts to impose rightwing Christian mores, Akin simply said that they should be more worried about the deficit.
The Constitution? Akin has apparently read the Federalist Papers in a very selective fashion (or somebody gave him selective information), since he offers these documents as proof that the General Welfare Clause should be interpreted narrowly. He thinks that the constitution has to mean “what the intent was” or it’s meaningless. Of course that begs the question of what the intent was, something that the various Federalist Papers address in different ways.
The economy? Filtered through Akin’s old-fashioned, John Birch-like
filter mindset which misapprehends topics like the Fed’s quantatative easing, the deficit and the stimulative effects of tax cuts. Lots of scaremongering that would be funny if there weren’t plenty of fools who subscribe to the same beliefs.
Defense? He never met a defense dollar that was misspent.
Finally, best evasion ever. When asked if the world actually began 10,000 years ago, Akin allowed modestly that he didn’t know, he wasn’t there.
The host, Don Marsh, remarked at one point, in response to Akin’s evasions, that words do matter. And, in case you’re interested in the words uttered by Akin when his imagination is more unfettered than during today’s interview, he is at his best stream-of consciousness, totally ignorant glory in this video (h/t The Turner Report):