Asked for Comment, Todd Akin Replied “I Don’t See Why He Resigned.”

Former interim dean of the Saint Louis University law school, Tom Keefe, has resigned. From The Daily Caller:

“In the beginning I gave an interview and I stuck my foot in my mouth, and I’ve been sticking my foot in my mouth ever since,” Keefe said Monday, according to the Post-Dispatch. “I’m 60 years old and I’m going to say what I’m going to say.”

What he said in that first interview was that he wouldn’t be “Father Bondi’ butt boy,”as  in the Lawrence Bondi, S.J., the university’s president. That was only the beginning. He went on to say “Life is a bitch. If it was easy, we would call it a slut, ” and “I’ve been drunker than ten big Indians.” The article also reports the following colorful details about Mr. Keefe:

In still another incident, Keefe reportedly asked a female law student if she was “wearing any panties” at a school meeting. He also inquired whether another female would be “getting stuffed” at the barrister’s ball (more or less the law school prom).”

Gee, maybe an ambulance chaser without any previous academic experience wasn’t the best choice for an interim dean …

I will say one thing. I wish this guy had been dean when I was in law school. It would have been like one of the 80′s movies starring one of those actors named Cory. I don’t know which one. They were all named Cory in those movies.


When it Comes to Women’s Rights, the Guy Barack Obama Supports Makes Todd Akin Look Like a Feminist

Do Sandra Fluke and Lena Dunham know about this?

As we discussed on yesterday’s show with our guest Daniel Greenfield of Sultan Knish, if you’re paying attention, you’ll notice a disturbing pattern in the way that the Obama administration deals with the turmoil in the Middle East. Bottom Line: The One sides with the Islamists. Consider Libya and Egypt. In both countries, the Obama administration kicked allies to the curb to help install Islamist regimes. Iran in June, 2009 was another story. In that case, Barack Obama didn’t want “to be seen as meddling” in another country’s affairs.

It’s indisputable that Obama is on the side of the Islamists. If his foreign policy decisions were not evidence enough, he wrote in his silly, boring, navel-gazing book, The Audacity of Hope, “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” I guess that the bright side is that, for once, he’s keeping a promise.

I picture B. Hussein watching Egyptian President, the Muslim Brotherhood’s own, Mohamed Morsi, deciding that he can dispense with the other two branches of government because he is effectively God, and thinking “That’s what I’m talking about!”

So, it’s no surprise that Barack is a Morsi fan, but I wonder if some of Barry’s biggest boosters, Lena Dunham and Sandra Fluke, and others of their ilk, know that their guy is supporting a regime that finds it intolerable to include a provision in its new constitution that prohibits child marriage and sex slavery. That’s Egypt today. From the British site, Inter Press Service:

An ultraconservative Salafi cleric recently sparked outrage among Egypt’s liberal circles when he attempted to justify his opposition to a proposed constitutional article that would outlaw the trafficking of women for sex.

Speaking on privately-owned Al-Nas satellite channel, Sheikh Mohamed Saad El-Azhary said he feared the proposed article could conflict with the local practice of child marriage. He explained that in Egypt, particularly in rural areas, there is a culture of marrying off girls as soon as they hit puberty.

“The important thing is that the girl is ready and can tolerate marriage,” El-Azhary declared.

He goes on to warn of just how far it could go if this radical, anti-child marriage provision is allowed to go forward.

He went on to protest proposed laws protecting women from violence, warning that if allowed to pass husbands could be prosecuted for beating their child brides or forcing themselves upon them.

“If you have intercourse with your wife against her will, she will be able to file a complaint against you,” he said. “That’s where things are headed.”

What’s next? Women driving? Leaving the house without the permission of a male relative? By the way, this guy is part of the group writing the new Egyptian constitution.

One of the great things about being a liberal is the ability to operate with a high degree of self-righteousness, free of any concern that the positions that you passionately defend are irreconcilably conflicting. You can be a feminist who wants freedom and choice for women, who should be seen as strong and independent, except that they expect someone else to pay for their contraceptives, and you can support a guy for president who endorses an Egyptian regime that doesn’t consider it a “legitimate rape” when a man forces himself on his wife.

No wonder liberalism is so popular among the intellectually lazy and/or challenged.

Also: Women’s equality absent from Egyptian constitution

Liberals Assault the English Language, Then Cry Rape

Among the many adorable traits of our liberal friends, one of my favorites is their propensity to shoehorn common English words into the confines of their ideology by redefining them until they’ve lost any resemblance to their actual meanings. They know that they could never convince most Americans to go along with their freedom-destroying, wealth-redistributing, big federal government schemes if they were honest about what they want to do. So, until they can get rid of that pesky ballot box and that annoying democratic Republic framework created by those evil dead white Europeans, they have to continue to use obfuscation and deception to con as many people as possible.

Ironically, one of the Left’s heroes, FDR, changed the meaning of the word “liberal” itself back in 1932.

In the wake of the ridiculous and destructive comments by MO Senate candidate Rep. Todd Akin about “legitmate rape,” the Obama campaign has unleashed Sandra Fluke, and others of her repellant ilk, to hector Paul Ryan about his pro-life views, demanding that he explain why he co-sponsored a “Sanctity of Life” statute (the nerve!) with Rep. Akin that included the phrase “forcible rape,” a phrase that has been used in criminal statutes for centuries. Lawyers understand that, especially when defining the reason someone might spend years behind bars, it’s better to be redundant than ambiguous.

Back in the day, everyone understood what “rape” meant. That was when our great-grandmothers would keep the light on and the door open in parlor when entertaining a gentleman caller, who would certainly need to leave by midnight. Then came the feminists of the 1970′s, who decided that all women were victims of something they called “patriarchy.” The feminists had an easy answer for women hoping to avoid enslavement by this patriarchy and its subjugating institutions like marriage (another word that the Left has raped and abandoned by the side of the road); specifically, hit the sheets with as many guys as possible. The great news was that all this recreational sex would be consequence-free, thanks to the legalization of abortion and no-questions asked birth control dispensaries like Planned Parenthood! How awesome was that!

Sadly, there were some downsides to the “liberation” of what came to be known as “the sexual revolution,” and not just the many sexually-transmitted diseases. In addition, there was a blurring of the line between “rape” and “consensual” sex. Since women were now “liberated”, a woman could go out to a bar, get stinking drunk, go home with 7th Fleet, and wake up with no memory of what happened after her 6th martini. Since women were also victims, that same woman could still claim to have been “raped.” So could a woman who went out on a date and ended up having sex with her escort. She could decide after the fact that she had actually been “raped.” In fact, any time a woman had sex, she had a credible claim to being “raped” in the eyes of some radical feminists.  Some women lamented the insistence by the feminists that we are all “victims,” realizing it was the feminists themselves who had created a culture of victimhood to try to make themselves relevant, but the damage was done. Predictably, the Lame Stream Media and academia injected this nonsense into our culture, where it remains today.

While they were helping other liberals destroy the traditional family, feminists invented the notion of “acquaintance rape” aka “date rape” in the 1980′s. Now they wonder why there might some need for a clear definition of “rape” in a statute? I guess I’m a bit confused. I thought that liberals were obsessed with the rights of criminal defendants. With the advent of “date rape,” their rights went right out the window. From the William and Mary Journal of Women and the Law:

In recent decades, defendants have increasingly fallen victim to rules and treatment, inspired primarily by political correctness, that shortchange them of their constitutional rights, whether guilty or not. Due to this modern trend, the presumption of guilt against

alleged perpetrators of date rape is already stacked against them in today’s politically correct atmosphere. (Citing Until Proven Innocent by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, 2007, a book about the Duke Lacrosse case).

Once again, liberals destroy what is good, decent, and just plain common sense, then try to masquerade as bystanders. Paul Ryan is right: “rape is rape.” Liberals who decided differently are now attempting to profit politically from their disastrous social policies.

Rep. Akin, This is No Time for Ego. It’s Time to Say Goodbye.

Those who know me well will vouch for the fact that I am not a fan of unsolicited advice. If there’s one thing I never want to be it’s what we lawyers call “the officious intermeddler,” what regular people would call someone who hasn’t learned to mind his own business. I also despise the knee-jerk impulse by most politicians to scatter like cockroaches whenever a colleague steps in it. So, I haven’t said much about the Ted Akin “legitimate rape” fiasco that started Sunday. And some of you said I’d never have anything in common with Bill Clinton. He is one of the few politicians who hasn’t weighed in on this issue. I can’t imagine why not …

Is it just me, or should an alleged grownup in a responsible position think twice before uttering the phrase “legitimate rape?” Dude, we know you meant “forcible rape,” as a way of distinguishing it from the idiotic notion, invented and perpetuated by liberals, of “date rape,” but that’s not what you said, and as I am fond of saying, words mean things. Frankly, the older I get, the less tolerance I have for stupid, and this comment was just that. Don’t we have enough stupid in Washington as it is? Of course we do!

It’s unquestionable that Rep. Akin, for the good of the country, should step aside. All his support, including that crucial financial support, has dried up. Karl Roves’ super PAC, Crossroads GPS and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have announced that as long as Rep. Akin is the candidate, they won’t spend a dime on this race. Plus, the polls showing Akin still ahead are pure agit-prop baloney, with a sample skewed to make it look like this guy isn’t box office poison. He is.

Perhaps we need some help from Mama Grizzly #1, who endorsed one of Akin’s primary opponents, former state Treasurer Sarah Steelman, right before the August 7 election. Governor Palin, please see what you can do to make this right. As you know, there’s way too much at stake to potentially lose this race. Nothing less than the future of America is on the ballot on November 6.

Rep. Akin, staying in the race doesn’t make you courageous. It makes you stubborn and egotistical. If you do the right thing, you could live to fight another day. If you don’t, you could go down in history as the guy who cost America the Senate.