By Brandon Rising
(original article)
I'm writing this article to those who may not have agreed with the entire article, but by sharing it have voiced their approval of what is essentially forgeries of the truth and blatant cover ups of the real facts. So below we'll start with a quote from the article.
"Or the male friends who say that they love their wives and daughters and respect their sisters and mothers and who at the very least feign outrage at the likes of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock when they talk about "legitimate rape" and pregnancy from rape intended by God but who aren't remotely offended nor bothered that the Republican Party just gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Akin's campaign, that Paul Ryan co-sponsored bills with Akin using the only slightly different and no less egregious term "forcible rape" or that Mitt Romney reiterated his support for Mourdock the day after he said that he stood by his statement that pregnancy from rape is intended by God."In this statement we see Jess Wilson taking a democratic talking point and running with it. Todd Akin's statement about "legitimate rape" was scientifically misguided. (More on that here) But the term legitimate rape still had merit. If you've never heard about a woman, young or old, lying about being raped, then you're lucky because it is definitely a terrible lie when they do it. It signals to the rest of us that it doesn't always need to be taken so seriously if someone, a woman, can so blatantly lie about such a thing. But, he was not suggesting that every rape needs to be verified, but that there are cases when it's not the truth.
Next, Jess also managed to bring in a statement by Richard Mourdock and continue with what I can only imagine is a copy and paste idea from another article Jess read on MSNBC. The real quote from Richard Mourdock below (video link):
“You know, this is that issue that every candidate for federal or even state office faces. And I have to certainly stand for life. I know that there are some who disagree, and I respect their point of view. But I believe that life begins at conception. The only exception I have to have on abortion is in that case — of the life of the mother. I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God. And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen."So, in Jess Wilson's article she states that what Richard Mourdock has said is "pregnancy from rape intended by God". However, if you've read what Mr. Mourdock has said, you can see the plain fact that that is not the case. He stated that he believes "life begins at conception." (This could be debated, if you want to tell yourself that a unique strand of DNA is not a human because it doesn't meet your arbitrary guidelines of having so many fingers, toes, or eyes, then that is up to you.) But that he believes that the life form is a gift from God, not the rape. Thanks Jess Wilson, but we'll take the facts not the mushy falsifications.
On to the next part of the article, I wish Jess didn't have to mislead and misrepresent so often, it'd make my article much shorter, but I digress.
"And what really baffles me -- truly has me scratching my head -- are the ones who claim that they're voting for the GOP because they believe that the federal government has far overreached its intended domain -- that we're overregulated and overlegislated and they want the government out of their personal decisions about their lives -- but who are voting for men who have pledged to reach as far as they can into the decisions that women -- me, their wives, their sisters, their daughters, their mothers -- can make about our lives and our bodies and our fates. Or the decisions that my friends can make -- and that our children will someday make -- about who they marry, because they have also pledged to ensure that if the person we love is similarly gendered, we will have no right to marry them. How is that not the greatest hypocrisy of them all?"Oh, Jess, how you become so easily confused is beyond me. Scratching your head, being the universal sign of befuddlement, must mean that the following statement is so utterly incomprehensible to you that your readers must follow suit in their absolute bewilderment. However, for those of us with our thinking caps on, it really isn't as difficult to follow along. Unless of course you were scratching your head because you've got some sort of scalp issues but that, we'll assume the former is true.
Jess starts off this statement by talking about the GOP's aims to reduce the size of government, which is mostly aimed at regulations harnessing the power of the Americans small business potential, and takes a sharp left turn into social issues. I suppose it would be because it's easier to skew ideas than trying to explain a terrible economic situation. Continuing down the statement into the social issues, Jess states that we are voting to reach "into the decisions that women -- me, their wives, their sisters, their daughters, their mothers -- can make about our bodies. . ." Is this an allusion to wanting to stop women, including my mother and sister, from having abortions just because they've made an irresponsible decision? Because the Romney/Ryan ticket is clear on this issue, and has always been. Their stance on abortion is that it should be illegal with exceptions in the cases of incest or rape, which does not have to be proven, and for the life of the mother. Why is this so hard to remember?
In fact here are two videos, one from 2008 (here) and one from 2012 (here) that continue that trend. He is pro-life, with exceptions to incest, rape, and life of the mother. Now if you would like to take videos out of chronological order, he did change his stance (video) between 2002 and 2005 from legal abortion to illegal with exceptions. However, since he has become pro-life he has remained pro-life. If anyone on this planet has any documentation, video, audio, quotes or substantial proof to the contrary, leave it in the comments.
And finally, as if the title was foretelling what Jess would sum up in here closing statements, she ends with the following paragraph:
"I've tried to stay quiet. I know that this is my perspective and I know that others feel just as passionately about what they believe is right. I know that the abortion issue in particular is hard. I really do. I understand that if you believe that life begins at conception then there is a visceral need to protect that life. I get that. But I also believe that there has to be an overriding mechanism of mercy somewhere in the process. That if a woman -- or a girl -- is raped, a victim of incest, dying, that there has to be a point at which she is given back the choice that was otherwise so violently taken from her."The title of Jess Wilson's article is "The Biggest Hypocrisy of All". Which is odd, having taken an entire article to rip into the Romney campaign with lies, misguided accusations, falsehoods, whatever you'd like to classify it as, but then turns around and agrees with the Romney position!
Quote, "That if a woman -- or a girl -- is raped, a victim of incest, dying. . ." That is the Romney position, in the case of rape, incest, or the life of the mother, there are those exceptions for abortion. So, what she's telling me is that she took an entire article to bemoan the Romney position on many things, only to agree with it in the end of the article? Really?
Finally, her article was about hypocrisy. The dictionary definition is here:
The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.The ending of her article is about her struggles with keeping all of this truth and goodness inside of her. She really didn't want to offend anyone she says. Yet, here we are. At the end of the article Jess Wilson, having spouted the talking points she has been given by the White House, MSNBC, or some other liberal media outlet, unwittingly agreeing with the Romney position on abortion.
Dear Jess Wilson, the White House called, they want their hypocrisy back.
This article was written and researched in 1hr 47min by a Canadian who is clearly for Mitt Romney. If you think you've come across an error in my argument, a fact that can be refuted, or a typo, leave a comment below.
Thanks for reading -- Brandon Rising
