In response to:

Rape, God, Life and Liberals

Gary 919 Wrote: Oct 26, 2012 7:51 PM
Liberals are by definition averse to civil discourse no matter the subject. Civil discourse is to the liberal position what water is to fire. As my brother says, arguing with a liberal is like dueling with an unarmed man. Notice David Axelrod sometimes, when "civil discourse" invades his space he becomes highly excitable and agiated, raises his voice and tries to appear angry and will not be silenced for any reason until it's time for a commercial break. Demagoging is all they know.

Let's stipulate that people, and particularly politicians, can get into trouble by attempting to speak for God. But that's not the moral of the story regarding Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock.

Responding to a question about abortion, Mourdock offered a grieved response -- his voice breaking a bit -- on the matter of which exceptions he favored. His Democratic opponent, Joe Donnelly, also pro-life, said that he would permit abortions in cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother. Mourdock said he had "struggled with it . . . for a long time," but had come...