Do we even have anybody to match this? :o)

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Wolfstan**

Susanne Atanus, who believes gay rights cause tornadoes and autism is a punishment from God, wins Illinois Republican primary

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/susanne-atanus-who-believes-gay-rights-cause-tornadoes-and-autism-is-a-punishment-from-god-wins-illinois-republican-primary-9204598.html

A congressional candidate in Chicago, who blames natural disasters such as tornados on gay rights and claims autism is a punishment from God, has won the GOP nomination and will challenge Democrat Jan Schakowsky for the 9th Congressional district of the city.

Among her many controversial views, Susanne Atanus is vehemently against access to abortion, marriage equality and the rights of gay men and women.

The 55-year-old has claimed that same-sex marriages “breed aids” and autism and dementia are punishments from God.

During a filmed interview with her opponent David Earl Williams for The Daily Herald in January, Atanus made her views clear with remarks such as: "I am not in favour of abortions, I am not in favour of gay rights."

"God controls the weather. God is angry. We are provoking him with abortions and same-sex marriage and civil unions," she continued. "Same-sex activity is going to increase AIDS. If it's in our military, it will weaken our military. We need to respect God."

According to unofficial totals, Atanus received 15,238 votes compared with Williams’ 13,864 votes, The Park Ridge Sun Times has reported.

Republican moved quickly to distance themselves from Atanus following her comments. Illinois Republican Chairman Jack Dorgan called on the candidate to end her congressional campaign, but Atanus refused to withdraw from the GOP primary.

In a statement, he said: “The offensive statements by Susanne Atanus have no place in the modern political debate, and she has no place on the ballot as a Republican.

“Her candidacy is neither supported nor endorsed by the leaders of our party, and she should withdraw from the race immediately.”

Adam Robinson, the chairman of the Chicago Republican Party, stressed that Atanus: "is not in any way affiliated with any of our efforts in the Chicago GOP, nor have we ever supported, endorsed, or assisted her in any way at any time."

**Hlaine Larkin mk2**

When the GOP thinks you're too crazy to roll with them that should be a sign

**SickSix**

Here is a Clue, this is in Chicago.

Crazy breeds crazy.

**marv335**

If she's as religious as she claims, she needs to withdraw.
God doesn't want women in positions of power.
It clearly says so in the Bible.
Timothy 2:12.

**Fafnir**

She is the best thing to happen to the Democrats in her district.

**Bullockist**

I'm curious who is being punished with autism. Is it the parents or does God hate children who don't potty train fast enough?

Could it be God hates vaccination and punishes those children who receive it with autism? That sounds plausible, where do I sign up to her newsletter???

**master of ordinance**

Wow. Just when you thought the crazy couldnt get more so

**Frazzled**

SickSix wrote:
Here is a Clue, this is in Chicago.

Crazy breeds crazy.

If its Chicago, she's irrelevant. All the dead voters reliably vote Democrat in Illinois.

As a rebuttal I give you Sheila Jackson Lee for the the Democrats, sadly from my own town.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/sheila_jackson_lee.html
http://www.chron.com/news/politics/gallery/Notable-quotes-from-Rep-Sheila-Jackson-Lee-77424.php#Notable-quotes-from-Rep-Sheila-Jackson-Lee-77424/photo-5026671.php?&_suid=1395331285137023113547593619643

http://www.dumbocratquotes.com/viewbyperson.php?personid=40

**Manchu**

Very, very glad to see a GOP state chairman saying things like:

The offensive statements by Susanne Atanus have no place in the modern political debate, and she has no place on the ballot as a Republican.

One step closer to morally viable conservatism in the USA.

**Bullockist**

Frazzled wrote:
SickSix wrote:
Here is a Clue, this is in Chicago.

Crazy breeds crazy.

If its Chicago, she's irrelevant. All the dead voters reliably vote Democrat in Illinois.

As a rebuttal I give you Sheila Jackson Lee for the the Democrats, sadly from my own town.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/sheila_jackson_lee.html
http://www.chron.com/news/politics/gallery/Notable-quotes-from-Rep-Sheila-Jackson-Lee-77424.php#Notable-quotes-from-Rep-Sheila-Jackson-Lee-77424/photo-5026671.php?&_suid=1395331285137023113547593619643

http://www.dumbocratquotes.com/viewbyperson.php?personid=40

I now can understand why Frazzled is such a grumpy conservative. I'd also like to sign up for that sheilas' newsletter , honestly some American politicians read like self parodying parodies. It makes me glad I live in Australia, and makes for very entertaining reading.

**Seaward**

Manchu wrote:
Very, very glad to see a GOP state chairman saying things like:
The offensive statements by Susanne Atanus have no place in the modern political debate, and she has no place on the ballot as a Republican.
One step closer to morally viable conservatism in the USA.

Now if only we could start taking steps towards morally viable liberalism. It'd be nice if the Democrats policed their own nutjobs.

**Ma55ter_fett**

Seaward wrote:
Manchu wrote:
Very, very glad to see a GOP state chairman saying things like:
The offensive statements by Susanne Atanus have no place in the modern political debate, and she has no place on the ballot as a Republican.
One step closer to morally viable conservatism in the USA.

Now if only we could start taking steps towards morally viable liberalism. It'd be nice if the Democrats policed their own nutjobs.

How? This isn't the UK where they can kick out party members who don't toe the line.

**Kilkrazy**

@OP, we do have someone like that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-26034104

On the plus side, he has inspired a brilliant Twitter account.

https://twitter.com/UkipWeather

**Wolfstan**

Fair point I'd forgotten about him

**Peregrine**

Frazzled wrote:
If its Chicago, she's irrelevant. All the dead voters reliably vote Democrat in Illinois.

This. It's a solid democrat district where no other party is going to put any meaningful effort into contesting it, so you get the random crazy people who are willing to throw away their money to get some attention. They produce some good comedy occasionally, but they're not at all relevant to any serious issues.

Plus, it's a primary election, where only the most dedicated members of a party bother to keep up with who is running or show up to vote. So even in more competitive districts there's a significant bias in favor of candidates with views at the far end of the scale, just because they get their fellow rabid lunatics to show up and vote.

**Iron_Captain**

Russia has Zhirinovsky. I think he is hard to beat:

Zhirinovsky is well known for his boasts pertaining to other countries, having expressed a desire to reunite countries of the ex-Soviet "near abroad" with Russia to within the Russia's borders of 1900 (including Finland and Poland). He has advocated forcibly retaking Alaska from the United States (which would then become "a great place to put the Ukrainians"), turning Kazakhstan into "Russia's back yard", and provoking wars between the clans and the nations of the former Soviet Union and occupying what will remain of it when the wars are over.[26] Zhirinovsky, who encourages separatism within the Russian minority in the Baltic countries,[14] endorsed the forcible re-occupation of these countries and said nuclear waste should be dumped there.[26][27]

In 1999, at the start of the Second Chechen War, Zhirinovsky, the ardent supporter of the first war in Chechnya in the mid-1990s, advocated hitting some Chechen villages with tactical nuclear weapons.[28] He has also advocated using nuclear weapons and naval blockade-imposed starvation in a case of Russia's war against Japan.[26] In 2008, during the resulting political row between the United Kingdom and Russia, he suggested dropping nuclear bombs over the Atlantic Ocean in an effort to flood Britain.[14]

And that is only a small sample of his brilliance

The worrying part is that he is actually one of the larger political parties in Russia.

**MrDwhitey**

That's not something to be proud of.

**purplefood**

He's also apparently an idiot...
The UK floods anyway. Why waste nukes on it?

**Frazzled**

Peregrine wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
If its Chicago, she's irrelevant. All the dead voters reliably vote Democrat in Illinois.

This. It's a solid democrat district where no other party is going to put any meaningful effort into contesting it, so you get the random crazy people who are willing to throw away their money to get some attention. They produce some good comedy occasionally, but they're not at all relevant to any serious issues.

Plus, it's a primary election, where only the most dedicated members of a party bother to keep up with who is running or show up to vote. So even in more competitive districts there's a significant bias in favor of candidates with views at the far end of the scale, just because they get their fellow rabid lunatics to show up and vote.

Agreed on all counts.

**Medium of Death**

Surely somebody in the party needs to have nominated this repellent whore in order for her to be running as a candidate?

Why don't they just forcibly withdraw her?

She can form her own party surely?

**Dreadclaw69**

Medium of Death wrote:
She can form her own party surely?

Yeah but I'm sure the Monster Raving Loony Party has their name protected

**squidhills**

Medium of Death wrote:
Surely somebody in the party needs to have nominated this repellent whore in order for her to be running as a candidate?

Why don't they just forcibly withdraw her?

She can form her own party surely?

That's not how it works here in the U.S. The party doesn't actually nominate anyone to do anything. Anybody who can raise the money to fund a campaign can run, and claim affiliation with whichever party they want (if you want to actually get funds from said party coffers, it helps to agree with most or all of their platform, though). In primary elections, a bunch of people from the same party compete against each other to see who will be the one to challenge one guy from the other party (two party system here). Primary elections are the closest thing to a party "nominating" anyone, but the party only puts a rubber stamp on what voters have already decided.

**Frazzled**

Medium of Death wrote:
Surely somebody in the party needs to have nominated this repellent whore in order for her to be running as a candidate?

Why don't they just forcibly withdraw her?

She can form her own party surely?

I doubt you have to be nominated. Why?

**d-usa**

Frazzled wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
If its Chicago, she's irrelevant. All the dead voters reliably vote Democrat in Illinois.

This. It's a solid democrat district where no other party is going to put any meaningful effort into contesting it, so you get the random crazy people who are willing to throw away their money to get some attention. They produce some good comedy occasionally, but they're not at all relevant to any serious issues.

Plus, it's a primary election, where only the most dedicated members of a party bother to keep up with who is running or show up to vote. So even in more competitive districts there's a significant bias in favor of candidates with views at the far end of the scale, just because they get their fellow rabid lunatics to show up and vote.

Agreed on all counts.

Maybe that's part of the republican master plan?

Chicago is flying rodent gak crazy so they "run" republicans because they have to, but they only run republicans that are impossible to elect.

That way you always make sure that democrats run crazy town and the republicans in the rest of the country can point to Chicago and ask "is this what you want!?"

**purplefood**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Medium of Death wrote:
She can form her own party surely?

Yeah but I'm sure the Monster Raving Loony Party has their name protected

I think Screaming Lord Sutch died a while ago so it may be open...

**Polonius**

Yeah, it's hard to find sacrificial lambs for districts like that.

It's going to be slightly embarrassing for the GOP on a national level, but I doubt it'll influence many of the races in a meaningful way.

Of course, somebody crafty is going to eventually ask the GOP exactly what parts they're disavowing, and which they agree with.