If you live in certain districts in the states of Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Masschussetts, Tennessee, Connecticut, Michigan or Iowa, there's a possibility a Republican candidate with a pronounced, strongly anti-woman background--maybe even criminal allegations filed against him--could be elected.
One example: Republican "Young Gun" Tom Ganley (OH-13) is involved in a lawsuit filed against him by a disillusioned conservative female campaign worker alleging sexual assault and employment discrimination. It's troubling, especially when you consider the woman was a Tea Party "true believer" who seems to have withheld her accusations, not wanting to help another candidate who is pro-choice. (Incumbent Betty Sutton, the Democrat being challenged by Ganley, has no such record of sexual assault of her campaign staff, is pro-choice, and has voted in support of consumers, women, and supported the enormously popular public option as part of the health care reform bill.)
That is, Ganley's accuser is hardly a liberal with a political axe to grind, but instead a die-hard conservative who had every reason to prop up Ganley. While there's been no determination of guilt or innocence of the allegations, Ganley's involvement does raise the question: can he reasonably and impartially stand up as a lawmaker for women who have experienced those kinds of abuses? After all, what's wrong is wrong and sexual assault is wrong, no matter the politcal party of the person who committed it.
As usual, there are crickets on the right in support of the conservative woman who was mistreated and possibly assaulted by Ganley. You'd think "mama grizzlies" would speak up for one of their own. Too busy appearing on FOX tv, maybe?
Cynematic blogs at P i l l o w b o o k.