Ohio Republican Marisha Agana doesn’t mention abortion on her campaign website. In fact, the pediatrician-turned-Republican-congressional-candidate stays far away from social issues altogether in her online platform. But the former Philippine immigrant says that it is her experience as a youth under a socialist regime that gave her license to compare President Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler on her twitter feed. “History has a way of repeating itself: Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tse Tung and now Obama!” the Ohioan tweeted.

Agana said that she believes what she wrote, although it may have been poorly worded. 

“I am 100% against abortion and I am excited that this issue has come to the forefront of my campaign. I know life begins at conception and therefore those yet to be born are actually living human beings and should be taken care of not killed.

I hope all of you understand my position on abortion better now and why I put national leaders that believe in and support abortion into a special group of leaders who have either committed or supported genocide.

Because of this and the position Mr. Barrack Hussain Obama has taken on abortion directly as well as the use of Obamacare to provide contraception and abortifacient drugs I feel it is proper and important to have included him on the list I tweeted about.”

Agana although she says she is “excited” that the issue of abortion has come up, her actual position is a little less clear. She claims to be “100 percent against abortion,” and says she is “pro-life without exceptions.” She professes her desire to see Roe v. Wade overturned and the long stalled “heartbeat ban” put into effect in the state. But at the same time, she also says “I will be one of those who will defer those decisions to each individual just like that choice was given to me.”

Ummmm….

Marielena Stuart, also an immigrant, in this case from Cuba, has made reproductive rights a key plank in her platform in the Florida Republican senate primary. Along with her vows to “battle socialism” and ensure “Sharia law” has “no place in our nation and our commerce,” Stuart demands a return to “pro-family and pro-natalistic policies.”

Stuart isn’t going to be Florida’s next senator. In fact, it’s fairly unlikely that she will break into the double digits in the state’s multi-candidate primary on August 14th.  Republican Congressman Connie Mack has nearly 40 percent support in all of the polls, and that was before his closest rival dropped out of the race.

But like Agada, Stuart is another example of what the new, ultra-extreme anti-choice candidates for office look like. Stuart calls out anti-choice groups for being too lenient, in this instance for not banning abortion when it puts the pregnant woman’s life at risk.

Is there any doubt that among anti-choice candidates running for office, forcing women to bear pregnancies that are dangerous to them emotionally physically is the new normal? Arizona blogger Michael Bryan notes that when it comes to the ten federal congressional races in the state in 2012 (one senate seat, nine congressional seats) nine of them involve at least one Republican candidate who thinks forcing a rape victim to give birth is perfectly acceptable.

GOP politicians who favor forcing women to bear the children of rape and incest include: Jon Paton in CD1, Martha McSally in CD2, Gabriela Saucedo Mercer and Jaime Vasquez in CD3, Paul Gosar (who even seems to oppose abortion even to save the life of the mother) and Ron Gould in CD4, Kirk Adams and Matt Salmon in CD5, David Schweikert in CD6 (I guess Benny is soft on abortion),  Trent Franks in CD8, and Leah Campos Schandlbauer, Travis Grantham, Vernon Parker, Wendy J. Rogers, and Martin Sepulveda in CD9.

In fact, in most Congressional districts, Republicans don’t have a choice about choice: they only have candidates who support forcing women to carry rape and incest pregnancies to term.

Indeed, most GOP candidates for State Legislature also support forcing victims of rape and incest to term as well, even in presumably competitive districts.

This is the new “mainstream.” The only question is whether the next crop of candidates will all consider life of the mother exceptions to be unacceptable.