What about principles?

Driving home from work last night, I was listening to the last half hour of the Levin show on the radio.  He had the Chairman of the RNC on as his guest (don't recall his name), and when I dialed in the radio, the discussion was about Todd Akin.

The Chairman seemed adamant that the RNC and the Republican Party's national body distance itself ("divorce itself" was the term he used) from anything to do with Akin... for obvious reasons.  His ignorant statement about a woman's ability to "shut down" conception at will, coupled with the outrageous statement that there are acceptable forms of rape (those that aren't "legitimate" seemingly) have brought a firestorm of heat from the press and public quarters in a race that is already very, very heated.

Levin seemed utterly ready to dedicate himself to voting for Akin, or anyone else sporting a GOP label, as long as it means we win the needed majorities in the House and maintain and extend the Senate majority, as well as gaining the White House.

I don't think Akin is going to win his race... not after the gaff.  Let's assume I'm right, for just a minute.

Is Levin right?  Do we continue to feed money, time and effort into a campaign that might very well be lost from the start... just to ensure the widest possible margin of victory across the national landscape?

Or is the Chairman right?  Is putting national funds and efforts behind the Akin race simply throwing good money away?

I'm going with the Chairman on this one.  The GOP is in a pinch... but it can't hope to win anything substantial if the standards set by the national GOP platform aren't met by the candidates running, and Akin did NOTHING to make me think he understands those standards or is willing to apply them to his personal or campaign performance.

In short, the GOP determined that "an abortion is an abortion" and that all life is sacred and worth protecting, period.  That means they are NOT trying to qualify when life is sacred and when it isn't.  Why then should we compromise conservative principles by saying that some "rapes" are legitimate and others are not?  Do we, as conservatives, not rail against the Dems and libs when they try to qualify terms and actions like "terrorist" versus "extremist"?  Do we not hate the fact that they live to "qualify" the means by which wealth, property and prosperity are measured and meted out according to their (the liberals) agendas, rather than the agendas of the individuals?

Akin stepped on his proverbial member, and should answer accordingly.  We hold the Democrats accountable for their gaffs and ignorant rants, do we not?  Akin should expect no better treatment from his own party than that.