28 Comments
 
Best Response

No, but it does not help their cause. Dems rolled out the 'war on women' campaign a while ago, now the dude comes out and says this a few months before a federal election, THEN another GOP dude comes out and defends him. To top it off, he apologizes for 'wording', but there's no possible alternate explanation that doesn't make him and everyone associated with him sound like a jackass.

The only thing Romney did right was to have his prospective right hand man call him and tell him to drop out of the race, and he didn't....and Romney himself didn't make the call so it's an opening into why he didn't publicly and personally put down the rabid dog.

There's no possible damage control on this, they just have to move on to the next topic and take their lumps. Expect the lady that beats him to make a media presence shortly. This probably cost them +/- a full percentage point come election day.

Get busy living
 

Akin said this morning that he won't apologize for being pro-life. I don't think he should have to either, but he might want to apologize for being an idiot. If this guy believes something as inane as a woman's body can prevent an unwanted pregnancy, he probably believes that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time.... or even that the speed of light is not a constant(which explains the apparent misgivings about the age of the universe) He was voted into the seat, and voting is the only right way to decide his future. But he could at least resign form the House Science and Technology committee.

 
Gomez AddamsHouse Science and Technology committee
This part is deliciously ironic. Oh hai, I baleeve in sayance y'all. Way to be a walking talking fucking stereotype.
Get busy living
 

"No, but it does not help their cause. Dems rolled out the 'war on women' campaign a while ago, now the dude comes out and says this a few months before a federal election, THEN another GOP dude comes out and defends him. To top it off, he apologizes for 'wording', but there's no possible alternate explanation that doesn't make him and everyone associated with him sound like a jackass."

WHich GOP dude came out and defended him

 

I thought Akin's foot-in-the-mouth moment and the stir it caused among the right wing illustrated an interesting conflict in pro-life thinking. The main argument made by pro-life groups and supporters is that life begins at conception, making abortion murder, immoral, and wrong. They try to dismiss claims that they are legislating a women's right to her body and instead are here to support the rights of the unborn.

But with all the republicans stepping up and saying Akin is insulting and wrong, and saying that they are okay with abortion in certain cases (like rape or when the mother's life is at risk), it's evident that protecting the unborn is not the only thing they take into consideration; they do take a woman's right to her body into account. Why else would "murder" be okay whether life is conceived from rape or not?

Which means all this parsing of what rape is, which rapes should count and which shouldn't, when abortions should be allowed, etc. is really just subjectively legislating when a woman can have a right to her body. And it makes a lot of the pro-life argument mostly a slippery slope.

 

He was most likely misspoke when he said legitimate and was meaning forcible rape, as defined by the bill that Republicans and a number of Democrats signed. It would have changed the Federal definition of rape to mean forcible rape.

Story is nothing more than hype. The bill only sought to stop Federal funding for abortion which to be honest, is rather fair. Whether you support abortion or not, it is generally something that most people want to avoid if at all possible.

But of course the media and Democrats will make this out to be Republicans banning abortion and all that other crap. God forbid people looked past the headlines.

 
TNAHe was most likely misspoke when he said legitimate and was meaning forcible rape, as defined by the bill that Republicans and a number of Democrats signed. It would have changed the Federal definition of rape to mean forcible rape.

Story is nothing more than hype. The bill only sought to stop Federal funding for abortion which to be honest, is rather fair. Whether you support abortion or not, it is generally something that most people want to avoid if at all possible.

But of course the media and Democrats will make this out to be Republicans banning abortion and all that other crap. God forbid people looked past the headlines.

No, changing 'legitimate' to 'forcible' does not change the nature of what he said. He stated that if a woman is raped and gets pregnant, then the rape could not have been forcible and must have been consensual, otherwise the woman's body would not have allowed her to get pregnant.

So if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, then the sex must have been consensual? You agree with this statement?

 
evan1482
TNAHe was most likely misspoke when he said legitimate and was meaning forcible rape, as defined by the bill that Republicans and a number of Democrats signed. It would have changed the Federal definition of rape to mean forcible rape.

Story is nothing more than hype. The bill only sought to stop Federal funding for abortion which to be honest, is rather fair. Whether you support abortion or not, it is generally something that most people want to avoid if at all possible.

But of course the media and Democrats will make this out to be Republicans banning abortion and all that other crap. God forbid people looked past the headlines.

No, changing 'legitimate' to 'forcible' does not change the nature of what he said. He stated that if a woman is raped and gets pregnant, then the rape could not have been forcible and must have been consensual, otherwise the woman's body would not have allowed her to get pregnant.

So if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, then the sex must have been consensual? You agree with this statement?

Calm down killer. I don't support any of it, all I am saying is that there are two parts to the outrage directed at him.

1) Legitimate rape

2) You don't get pregnant from rape

Part 1 is what I believe he misspoke on. Part two I have no idea about.

 

"I thought Akin's foot-in-the-mouth moment and the stir it caused among the right wing illustrated an interesting conflict in pro-life thinking. The main argument made by pro-life groups and supporters is that life begins at conception, making abortion murder, immoral, and wrong. They try to dismiss claims that they are legislating a women's right to her body and instead are here to support the rights of the unborn.

But with all the republicans stepping up and saying Akin is insulting and wrong, and saying that they are okay with abortion in certain cases (like rape or when the mother's life is at risk), it's evident that protecting the unborn is not the only thing they take into consideration; they do take a woman's right to her body into account. Why else would "murder" be okay whether life is conceived from rape or not?

Which means all this parsing of what rape is, which rapes should count and which shouldn't, when abortions should be allowed, etc. is really just subjectively legislating when a woman can have a right to her body. And it makes a lot of the pro-life argument mostly a slippery slope."

I think most of the outrage on the GOP front has to do with the "woman's body has a way of shutting that whole thing down" part of the comment. This has no basis in actual science and has no place in the party. If he had just said that he does not believe that a child that is a product of rape, should be aborted and that we should execute the rapist and not the child there would be no controversy.

 

Only for realsies rape can lead to pregnancy, duh.

Under my tutelage, you will grow from boys to men. From men into gladiators. And from gladiators into SWANSONS.
 

Whatever. I am not even going to bother with this topic. No one is going to look at anything beyond a headline. Guy is going to lose or withdraw and that is all that matters.

 
Edmundo BravermanTurns out Akin's "theory" is a pretty popular pathology among GOP politicians:

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/08/akin-not-the-first-a-short-hi…

What a bunch of asshats...

The GOP is Ron Burgundy in the bar: times a changed, they did not. Knowing their competitive culture, they'll come around eventually and upgrade and try to do it better than anyone else. For the time being, they're fucking up and it's weird: they know it and can't stop themselves.
Get busy living
 

Amet harum qui nulla illo corrupti expedita. Ducimus nemo et molestiae ex culpa sed. Et et possimus dolorem aut. Alias dolores cum nemo vel officia consectetur. Soluta inventore provident itaque rerum rem. Corrupti accusamus vel dolor iste ullam.

Earum sunt in in velit fugiat. Consequatur illo aliquid enim ut aut minima et.

Eius voluptas id quasi qui suscipit exercitationem consequatur consequatur. Non facilis asperiores rerum beatae accusantium natus. Debitis necessitatibus aut assumenda mollitia sapiente debitis a. Eveniet velit consectetur et magni neque. A quia officia eos id quia rerum. Aperiam quos blanditiis deleniti ipsa ut iure delectus.

Ipsam dolorem et facilis unde. Quos placeat deserunt eum iure dolores nobis. Et et ad molestiae est. Deserunt porro tempore necessitatibus ad. Incidunt voluptatibus porro rerum repellendus est sunt maxime.

 

Libero error laboriosam quam assumenda repellat et. Sit nostrum delectus incidunt esse consequatur beatae. Qui deleniti quas consectetur omnis dolore commodi in officia.

Minus inventore voluptatem eum et. Eos quis esse accusamus tempora praesentium eveniet qui. Consequatur odio minus accusantium suscipit voluptatum. Et quod eveniet cumque molestias non maiores occaecati. Dolorum ut et sit ipsa magni.

Enim eveniet dolor inventore laborum consectetur quia quas qui. Reiciendis dolore quis et quas quaerat fuga sed quis.

Et reprehenderit enim neque nobis veritatis. Repellendus et inventore perferendis aut nobis. Dolorem laudantium porro id vel praesentium voluptas. Ex et autem maiores voluptatem sint neque tempore in.

Career Advancement Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.3%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.8%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.3%

Professional Growth Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.8%
  • JPMorgan No 97.3%

Total Avg Compensation

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (51) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (26) $182
  • Intern/Summer Associate (14) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”