Explicit Writing Democrat Scandal

Senator George Allen, (R-VA) has been having some campaign difficulties this year, in part stemming from gaffes on his part.

His challenger is James Webb, democrat and former Sec. of the Navy.

Allen has just unleashed a harsh press release dealing with Webb's books (he is an author, too) and their contents:
https://img138.imageshack.us/img138/1188/webbej0.jpg

Quote:

---

WEBB’S WEIRD WORLD

The Author’s Disturbing Writings Show a Continued Pattern of Demeaning Women

· Some of Webb’s writings are very disturbing for a candidate hoping to represent the families of Virginians in the U.S. Senate.

· Many excellent books about the United States military and wartime service accomplish their purposes, and even win awards, without systematically demeaning women, and without dehumanizing women, men and even children.

· Webb’s novels disturbingly and consistently – indeed, almost uniformly – portray women as servile, subordinate, inept, incompetent, promiscuous, perverted, or some combination of these. In novel after novel, Webb assigns his female characters base, negative characteristics. In thousands of pages of fiction penned by Webb, there are few if any strong, admirable women or positive female role models.

Why does Jim Webb refuse to portray women in a respectful, positive light, whether in his non-fiction concerning their role in the military, or in his provocative novels? How can women trust him to represent their views in the Senate when chauvinistic attitudes and sexually exploitive references run throughout his fiction and non-fiction writings?

Most Virginians and Americans would find passages such as those below shocking, especially coming from the pen of someone who seeks the privilege of serving in the United States Senate, one of the highest offices in the land:

---

The list is here:http://www.drudgereport.com/flashaw.htm

Something tells me this could be a factor in Republican Virginia.

Crazed Rabbit

I was liking the part about the guy with young, hard muscles(:yes: ); but from that point on, it went terribly, terribly wrong. :no:

I wouldnt vote for him!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince of the Poodles

I was liking the part about the guy with young, hard muscles(:yes: ); but from that point on, it went terribly, terribly wrong. :no:

I wouldnt vote for him!

---

Sicko. This is a family forum.:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince of the Poodles

I was liking the part about the guy with young, hard muscles(:yes: ); but from that point on, it went terribly, terribly wrong. :no:

---

Congrats! You made it to my sig! :laugh4:

Well, it's better than a certain Republican who had an inappropriate AIM relationship with a male page.

And that just makes it perfectly alright, does it?

CR

Of course it makes it perfectly alright. If you don't like Mr. Webb's brand of fiction, don't read it. No harm, no foul. In any case, both Senate candidates running in Virginia this election are totally repulsive to me.

I wouldn't call Georges campaign problems "gaffes." The guy is a confirmed control freak prone to violence and a racist, even the Republicans abandoned him after his what, like 4th or 5th min scandal broke.

What's hilarious about this is that now voters can choose between a writer who shows a consistent perversion and disrespect of women in his works, or they can choose a spoiled racist punk from a rich football family.

Right about now would be the time for a 3rd party candidate with a few million laying around to enter that race

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

What's hilarious about this is that now voters can choose between a writer who shows a consistent perversion and disrespect of women in his works, or they can choose a spoiled racist punk from a rich football family.

Right about now would be the time for a 3rd party candidate with a few million laying around to enter that race

---

Don't I wish... :gah2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiochusIII

Congrats! You made it to my sig! :laugh4:

---

:laugh4:

Okay...
Uumm yeah, so moving on from stories about vaginal bannana slicing I just had a very nice cup of tea.

Well, the novels are certainly... disturbing. But, I think the more relevant issues would be his sexism with statements like the naval academy being a horny woman's dream. Although his fiction writing does seem to reinforce some of that. :no:

It could be worse. Some of our politicians have actually become successful authors after being imprisoned...

Quote:

---

Right about now would be the time for a 3rd party candidate with a few million laying around to enter that race

---

And that's why you get no NORMAL people running for office over there. Whoever heard of a multi-millionaire that didn't have something in his closet that'd scare ordinary folk away?

Hey, CR. I'd recommend you add William S Burroughs to your reading list, he was (RIP) really into guns and freedom of speech etc etc.... you'd love his stuff .....

What the :inquisitive:

Proof that democrat voters don't read books?

It's fiction. georgy, on the other hand, is bona fide real life. I'm not gonna judge the guy, but this is what politics is all about, its about your past and how you live up to it. the deerhead and kwaanza may be the greatest political excuse of all time hahahah. but who knows about his opponent, we still have 2 weeks left, maybe his "fiction" will bring out some whistleblowers

Honestly, I don't care how fictional it is. It's sick and demented. 'Creating' child pornography using Photoshop is still pornography and writing about fathers giving their young sons hummers is sick, twisted fantasy. I'll resist the popular theme of comparing this to the Foley case, as that had ramifications of abuse of power and sexual harrassment. This on the other hand is truly pedophilia, as at least Foley's pages were of the age of consent in most states.

I don't care what anybody says. This Webb dude is a twisted sick creep and while I hate to say this, were I in Virginia, I would vote for George Allen. Actually, I'd probably vote Liberatarian. What a mess you folks have on your hands. :dizzy2:

You guys are a bunch of homophobs. Poor guy is just trying to open our eyes to the beauty of the world according to NAMBLA and GLADD. Shame on all of you intolerant bigots...

Well, if calling this disgusting trash what it is makes me a homophobe, I wear the title proudly. I don't know what on Earth would possess somebody to write something like that, but I do find it interesting that the MSM, knowing Webb is toast, is focusing more on Webb's misogyny in his writing, completely ignoring the 800 lb gorilla in the room.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

You guys are a bunch of homophobs. Poor guy is just trying to open our eyes to the beauty of the world according to NAMBLA and GLADD. Shame on all of you intolerant bigots...

---

Whoa... dont try and make that connection mister.

What that dude wrote was sick no matter what orientation you are.

WTF compels someone to write that ? Sounds like poor Webb is a modern day Republican in disguise. Now he just needs to learn how to blame the liberal elite for his problems and he'll be in like Flynn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince of the Poodles

Whoa... dont try and make that connection mister.

What that dude wrote was sick no matter what orientation you are.

---

Actually there is a connection. As you said in an earlier thread a person's sexuality is determined before birth. So, if homosexuality is not a chosen lifestyle, niether is pedifilia. Why are you degrading this poor misunderstood individual. Are you some sort of neanderthal? You have selective tolerance Sir, and you should be ashamed.:beam:

Riiiiight, any tolerance of homosexuality must also include tolerance of pedophilia. There's a logical progression for ya.

I haven't caught the news in the last 24 hours; has this torpedoed his candidacy? I can't imagine anyone being very jazzed about a candidate who writes explicit father/son sex scenes ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Actually there is a connection. As you said in an earlier thread a person's sexuality is determined before birth. So, if homosexuality is not a chosen lifestyle, niether is pedifilia. Why are you degrading this poor misunderstood individual. Are you some sort of neanderthal? You have selective tolerance Sir, and you should be ashamed.:beam:

---

That was pretty smart.

However, the difference is that homosexuality practiced between consenting adults does not hurt anyone.

Pedi does.

If I was attracted to kids I would just deal with it. I would not act on it nor glorify it in writings.

If this guy is a pedi, it sucks for him. He shouldnt be hated for that, but he should be condemned for supporting it through his writings.

However, I dont think he is. His other explicit stuff has a lot more to do with girls than guys, which puts them in a very negative light. :shame:

Just a question - does anybody know a bit more about the context of the quoted part of "Lost Soldiers".

It surprises me a bit that just based on the quoted sentences everybody seems to jump to the conclusion that Webb does not only endorse pedophilia but is a pedophile himself.

On a side note - I happen to like John Irving's books. I am sure that it would be an easy task to find similar quotes in his books (e.g., incest in "Hotel New Hampshire").
Does that make John Irving a disgusting person? Do I have to feel guilty for liking his books (no you don't have to answer, Dave ~;))

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Actually, I'd probably vote Liberatarian. What a mess you folks have on your hands. :dizzy2:

---

Probably my choice this year. I can't really in good conscious vote for either of these two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince of the Poodles

That was pretty smart.

However, the difference is that homosexuality practiced between consenting adults does not hurt anyone.

Pedi does.

If I was attracted to kids I would just deal with it. I would not act on it nor glorify it in writings.

If this guy is a pedi, it sucks for him. He shouldnt be hated for that, but he should be condemned for supporting it through his writings.

However, I dont think he is. His other explicit stuff has a lot more to do with girls than guys, which puts them in a very negative light. :shame:

---

But the definition of pedifilia these days, according to Lemur and many democrats, is graphic conversation with 16 year olds over the internet (age of concent is 16 in DC BTW). This guy is writing this stuff, it hasn't been proven that he's acting out on this.
Prince, btw, who are you to judge this man. If two homosexual guys, 16 years old, have sex, isn't that consenting? Are you discreminating against youths now? Strange how you can get all pissed when someone discusses your sexual orientation but yet you call someone that has a different preferance than yours, they're "sick". Judge not lest ye be judged.:smash:
Remember, its not that we choose who we love, I believe I read that from a GLADD pamplet or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ser Clegane

Do I have to feel guilty for liking his books (no you don't have to answer, Dave ~;))

---

I don't think you should feel guilty, but I do think you need a good healthy spanking for being a naughty little mod. You know how I love it when you mention me by name....~:flirt:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

But the definition of pedifilia these days, according to Lemur and many democrats, is graphic conversation with 16 year olds over the internet (age of concent is 16 in DC BTW).

---

Wow, you're just slingin' the lemur's name all over the place. Here's what I've said on this issue, so's you can slander me correctly:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I'm all for gay rights, but that has zero to do with this situation. I would feel the same way if Foley was having sex with a sixteen year old female. As for age of consent, I have never made any arguments on the subject, largely because I have no strong views on the matter. I don't think kids should be prosecuted for having sex with roughly same-aged kids (further direction should be on the parents, not the cops), but I do think there should be legal protection for kids from adults. The laws, as they stand, do a pretty good job.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. The forbidden fruit that tempted this Congressman were teenagers, so technically his disorder would be known as ephebophilia, which is the sexual attraction to kids who've reached or passed puberty. A distinction that will be entirely lost on the public at large, but there it is.

---

And most importantly:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Who here really believes that dirty IMs were the (pardon the pun) long and the short of it? What about that message about remembering San Diego (or wherever)? Let's get real for a minute, shall we? The odds are extremely high that Foley found opportunity to do more than type with these lads. If all he had done was exchange cyber-fantasies, I doubt he would have resigned in such a hurry.

---

There ya go, DevDave. If you're going to misrepresent me, please do so with accurate quotes.

Somewhat on topic - there recently was an interesting article on (the treatment of) pedophilia in Der Spiegel

"I Hate My Desires - They Make Me Sick"

No, Ser C, I don't think this story makes Webb a pedophile per se. I do think it makes me seriously question the values and the judgement of an author, regardless of his own desires, that would think this makes for good reading.

What's more, context is everything, and having read the passage in context, the father is a farmer, selling his rice at a agricultural collective. He blows his son in front of the buying agent, and proceeds to have a discussion about his rice harvest. Nobody bats an eye.

What does that say about the author's views? That in a normally funcitoning world, thinking adults wouldn't really bat an eye when a father publicly performs oral sex on his child?

Is this really the judgement we want to put into leadership in the Senate?

:help: Who are MSM, NAMBLA and GLADD -- I'm feeling a bit lost in all the acronyms (I think it's a wrong-side-of-the-Atlantic thing...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Wow, you're just slingin' the lemur's name all over the place. Here's what I've said on this issue, so's you can slander me correctly:



And most importantly:

There ya go, DevDave. If you're going to misrepresent me, please do so with accurate quotes.

---

Well, when the Lemur starts slinging the mud towards more than just republicans and conservatives, then the Dave will give the Lemur a break.:beam:

You and the Prince should start a club and call it the "Ministry of Selective Tolerance".
You should get a lot of members.

MSM: Shorthand for Mainstream Media. Usually used a a pejorative by people who get their news from other sources (bloggers, talk radio, etc.) From Wikipedia: "The mass-media audience has been viewed by some commentators as forming a mass society with special characteristics, notably atomization or lack of social connections, which render it especially susceptible to the influence of modern mass-media techniques such as advertising and propaganda. It is also gaining popularity in the blogosphere when referring to the mainstream media (MSM)."

NAMBLA: North American Man-Boy Love Association. A small group of profoundly creepy men who postulate that they have a right and obligation to have sex with pre-pubescent boys. Wiki link.

GLAAD: Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. Very similar to the other anti-defamation groups out there. Wiki link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

What does that say about the author's views? That in a normally funcitoning world, thinking adults wouldn't really bat an eye when a father publicly performs oral sex on his child?

---

I do not know the book - I have only read the review at "Publishers Weekly" on amazon:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Publishers Weekly

Webb's cultural and political portrayal of Vietnam 25 years after the war's end is delivered with such bold strokes and magical detail that it really doesn't matter that the plot itself is relegated to the backseat. This is a highly personal and empathetic look at today's Vietnam, a land of misery and inequity, yet one still vibrantly alive. The story follows the experiences of Brandon Condley, an ex-Marine whose job it is to find missing American soldiers, dead or alive. Condley is trying to track down Theodore Deville, an army grunt who not only deserted his unit in 1969 and killed a fellow serviceman, but then joined the ranks of the enemy. Condley is convinced Deville is still alive, operating somewhere in southeast Asia's underground economy. Webb introduces a rich cast of supporting characters as Condley pursues his quarry across Vietnam, Australia, the former Soviet Union and Thailand. Among the most delicately etched is Dzung, a former South Vietnamese officer now relegated, like thousands of others on the losing side, to a menial station in life, one that he and his family have no hope of escaping. Such characters, as well as the highly textured mood and atmosphere that Webb creates, tend to further eclipse the main narrative and shift the focus to the moral consequences and social fallout of the war. This detailed, lovingly drawn portrait of Vietnam reveals a sad, tortured country that has never recovered from the horrifying events of a quarter-century ago. Major print and radio advertising. (Sept. 4)Forecast: Webb (Fields of Fire) is no stranger to the bestseller lists; endorsements from heavy hitters like Sen. John McCain will help put him there once again.

---

Perhaps he wanted to show that it is not a functional world were a father performs oral sex on his son and nobody bats an eye?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Well, when the Lemur starts slinging the mud towards more than just republicans and conservatives, then the Dave will give the Lemur a break.:beam:

You and the Prince should start a club and call it the "Ministry of Selective Tolerance".
You should get a lot of members.

---

Show me a genuine conservative, and I'll happily tolerate him. I don't see any in the GOP; all I see is big-government hypocrites with an expansive social agenda. I'm supposed to be nice about them?

I don't need for you to "give me a break," heaven forbid. As I stated clearly, I would prefer if your attacks on my beliefs, person and integrity were grounded in things I have actually expressed.

[edit]

If you want to take this further, we should probably move into PM to avoid excessive thread hijacking.

Don't you think there's less dangerous ways to convey the moral fallout of a post-war society then offering up graphic descriptions of pedophilic incest?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Honestly, I don't care how fictional it is. It's sick and demented. 'Creating' child pornography using Photoshop is still pornography and writing about fathers giving their young sons hummers is sick, twisted fantasy.

---

Perhaps it is, but the difference is that nobody got hurt when this guy put his words on a page; and the same can not be said of Foley. (Get it? What a clever pun. I'm very proud of that one!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Honestly, I don't care how fictional it is. It's sick and demented. 'Creating' child pornography using Photoshop is still pornography and writing about fathers giving their young sons hummers is sick, twisted fantasy. I'll resist the popular theme of comparing this to the Foley case, as that had ramifications of abuse of power and sexual harrassment. This on the other hand is truly pedophilia, as at least Foley's pages were of the age of consent in most states.

---

C'mon Don, your really reaching there. If somebody writing about fictional man/boy sex is guilty of pedophilia, does that mean somebody writing about a serial killer is guilty of murder?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goofball

C'mon Don, your really reaching there. If somebody writing about fictional man/boy sex is guilty of pedophilia, does that mean somebody writing about a serial killer is guilty of murder?

---

I think Don's sentence means that the depiction is truly pedophilia, not that fiction = reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I think Don's sentence means that the depiction is truly pedophilia, not that fiction = reality.

---

You're right, I think. I posted that before reading the rest of the thread.

Sorry if I got you wrong, Don.

The act described in the book is pedophilia. No, that doesn't make Webb a pedophile, Goof, but 'artistic license' doesn't change the fact that the author chose to describe a pedophilic sexual act in a positive, or at worst morally neutral light.

As for "where's the harm" (for you BG), pedophiles seek out examples in pornography and literature to titliate them, yes, but also to seek reassurance that their desires are healthy and natural. This author chose to give them just that. So pedophiles sit around reading his book thinking "gee, I didn't do anything all that bad. It's natural what I did to that boy last week, and I shouldn't worry about trying it again". Yeah, who gets hurt?

Edit: Thanks Lemur, yes Goofy and I forgot to mention, yes, truly clever pun. Well done. :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goofball

Perhaps it is, but the difference is that nobody got hurt when this guy put his words on a page; and the same can not be said of Foley. (Get it? What a clever pun. I'm very proud of that one!)
?

---

Reminds me of a joke or two...
"The Republicans finally got some good news over the weekend. The North Koreans set off a nuclear bomb. Thank God. It was so powerful it knocked the Mark Foley story right off the front page. And knocked him off the page he was on, too." --Jay Leno

"I have the latest in the big Washington sex scandal. ... CNN is reporting that former Congressman Mark Foley's instant messages were not only sexually inappropriate, but were also full of typos. In his own defense, Foley said, 'It's hard to type with one hand.'" --Conan O'Brien

"Now more pages came forward today saying this thing with Foley goes back 11 years. Rush Limbaugh said today, 'You see, another threat Clinton completely ignored.' He also said, 'This would have never happened if Al Gore didn't invent the Internet.'" --Bill Maher

"The big question now is what should be done with Mark Foley's seat in Congress. I say, spray it with Lysol, boil it, coat it with Bactine, and then maybe you can sit on it." --Jay Leno

Anyone notice the serious lack of coverage of this in the media? No bias there, nope, not at all.:no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Don't you think there's less dangerous ways to convey the moral fallout of a post-war society then offering up graphic descriptions of pedophilic incest?

---

one may think that be the author decided to use it....if one doesn´t like that...then don´t read it.....the truth is that the GOP is embarassed over the page scandal so they are trying to make the democrats look bad also...no need to own up to their own black sheep if they can shift the public´s attention.

and as for "dangerous"....no book is dangerous...people are...

@ Lemur - thanks for the definitions, I'll have to continue on tomorrow's shift...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin

...no book is dangerous...

---

Spoken like a man who has never read Crabs on the Rampage!

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...7f6c971010.jpg

[edit]

Oh noes! Senator McCain is a pedophile too!

“James Webb’s new novel paints a portrait of a modern Vietnam charged with hopes for the future but haunted by the ghosts of its war-torn past. It captures well the lingering scars of the war, and exposes the tension between the dynamism of a new generation and the invisible bondage of an older generation for whom wartime allegiances, and animosities, are rendered no less vivid by the passage of time. A novel of revenge and redemption that tells us much about both where Vietnam is headed and where it has been.”
— Senator John McCain

Quote:

---

Prince, btw, who are you to judge this man. If two homosexual guys, 16 years old, have sex, isn't that consenting? Are you discreminating against youths now? Strange how you can get all pissed when someone discusses your sexual orientation but yet you call someone that has a different preferance than yours, they're "sick". Judge not lest ye be judged.

---

I believe the person in the text was refered to as a "young son" and a "boy" which leads me to believe he was far younger than the age of consent in any civilized society.

So:

Quote:

---

If two homosexual guys, 16 years old, have sex, isn't that consenting? Are you discreminating against youths now?

---

has little to do with the discussion, as the text did not describe such a situation.

Maybe its not being covered because its not a story. It's a shallow attempt at Allen to get some of the oh-noes-harry-potter-is-teh-devil folks to come over to his side. Webb books were far from being a failure, so apparently some people thought they were good reading. The guy has an impressive resume, and he's practically GOP from reading some of his official stances.

I don't remember people accusing Ronald Reagan of being a homo because he played a Notre Dame player in one of his movies. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

I don't remember people accusing Ronald Reagan of being a homo because he played a Notre Dame player in one of his movies. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

---

Are you kidding me!?!?! I'd agree with you if you said the Buckeyes, but not the Fighting Irish!!! Those boys in Ohio are total queens...:laugh4:

I think Ser C provided adequate information to invalidate any complaints about the passage in the book. If something is bizarre and sick and real, you should not be angry at the author who tells it, but at the people who do it.

Also, the attempt to portray him as a misogynist is laughable. Feminist critics tried to do the same thing with Hemingway in the 70s. I'm sorry, but I cannot take anyone seriously who objects to the portrayal of women as they are instead of how modern progressive thought would like them to be. Thousands of modern pulp writers do cave to the percieved pressure, peppering their books with "ideal" female characters that have no relation to reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

The act described in the book is pedophilia. No, that doesn't make Webb a pedophile, Goof, but 'artistic license' doesn't change the fact that the author chose to describe a pedophilic sexual act in a positive, or at worst morally neutral light.

---

The society he describes is morally neutral. Hopefully the readers in our world are not. Hence the scene that is designed to make us drop our monocles in our martinis.

Personally I think the scene he describes is over the top and unnecessary, but I feel this way about a lot of "popular" authors. Not so good.

You seem to run quite a circuit in your accusations:

Quote:

---

As for "where's the harm" (for you BG), pedophiles seek out examples in pornography and literature to titliate them, yes, but also to seek reassurance that their desires are healthy and natural. This author chose to give them just that. So pedophiles sit around reading his book thinking "gee, I didn't do anything all that bad. It's natural what I did to that boy last week, and I shouldn't worry about trying it again". Yeah, who gets hurt?

---

What is a pedophile doing reading this book ? Was it marketed to pedophiles ? Is the rest of the book full of so many scenes that is on the NAMBLA top ten list ? My goodness man.

Just how dangerous is this book ? Should we allow it ? Make people register in a national database before buying it ? THINK OF THE CHILDRENS!!

And you're voting Libertarian ?

Look, I'm all about letting consenting adults do whatever they think they might care to, as long as no innocents get harmed. But trust me, NAMBLA's chat rooms are probably abuzz with discussions about this book. Hell, they probably have a reading list of 'morally neutral' or 'acceptable' presentations of their crap.

Webb didn't break any laws, I'm not advocating tossing him in the klink. But is this really the sort of guy we want running the country? Come on Whydie, other than the D next to his name, what brings you to defend him still?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Come on Whydie, other than the D next to his name, what brings you to defend him still?

---

He needs no defense because he's done nothing wrong nor even questionable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Look, I'm all about letting consenting adults do whatever they think they might care to, as long as no innocents get harmed. But trust me, NAMBLA's chat rooms are probably abuzz with discussions about this book. Hell, they probably have a reading list of 'morally neutral' or 'acceptable' presentations of their crap.

Webb didn't break any laws, I'm not advocating tossing him in the klink. But is this really the sort of guy we want running the country? Come on Whydie, other than the D next to his name, what brings you to defend him still?

---

Honestly I don't even know the guys name, so its difficult to defend or crucify him. As I said before I think the paragraph in question is in poor taste and do question the need for it. I blame his (and other authors) attitude of literary lustony. Unrestrained literary whoring just for shock value. Again, not good.

But I do draw the line at it being the sole reason for voting against him or for even projecting the damage that the book could/does inflict. That is all. No support for the guys campaign.

Quote:

---

Webb didn't break any laws, I'm not advocating tossing him in the klink. But is this really the sort of guy we want running the country?

---

He wrote about an immoral act. Authors do it all the time, its part of fiction. Without conflict there is no story. There are books with rape, murder, torture in them. Are the authors of those books bad people. In the book does he say 'giving little boys hummers is a great idea'? From the sound of it he paints it as a bad thing, in a book about the moral hellhole life is after Vietnam.

Quote:

---

Also, the attempt to portray him as a misogynist is laughable. Feminist critics tried to do the same thing with Hemingway in the 70s. I'm sorry, but I cannot take anyone seriously who objects to the portrayal of women as they are instead of how modern progressive thought would like them to be. Thousands of modern pulp writers do cave to the percieved pressure, peppering their books with "ideal" female characters that have no relation to reality.

---

Let's see:
1) Hemingway had 'strong women' in his stories. Hills Like White Elephants being one.
2) It's funny you mention Hemingway. Hemingway wrote about how he thought men should be. Not about how they actually are. Check his suicide on that one.
3) Dropping a label on half the human population seems rather dumb. I'm sure out of 3 billion people you're going to find all types. Did you get dumped recently or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimBob

2) It's funny you mention Hemingway.

---

It is funny that I should mention Hemingway. Perhaps I did so because it is relevant.

http://www.cas.usf.edu/english/walke.../hemwomen.html

"Ernest Hemingway has often been accused of misogyny in his treatment of female characters (and, perhaps, in his treatment of women in his own life). "It is not fashionable these days to praise the work of Ernest Hemingway," says Frederick Busch. "His women too often seem to be projections of male needfulness" (1). Many of his stories are seen as prototypical bildungsroman stories--stories, usually, of young men coming of age. There are few, if any, stories in the canon of women coming of age, however, and Hemingway is not the first to suffer the wrath of feminist critics. But is this wrath justified?"

Also, I am a bit perplexed as now you seem ready to roll the same label on over to me. What was it that I said? Can you point out any quote from my post which can rightly be interpreted as expressing a particularly negative view of women?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemonArchangel

Of course it makes it perfectly alright. If you don't like Mr. Webb's brand of fiction, don't read it. No harm, no foul. In any case, both Senate candidates running in Virginia this election are totally repulsive to me.

---

Actually, I'm a pretty solid GOP voter and occasional contributor. Webb was correct about the Iraq aftermath and Allen was wrong. Webb's other positions are okay, but not exactly inspiring to this conservative. Allen has run a tawdry and repulsive campaign.

Result: I'd like both of them to lose and to leave the seat unfilled. I'll probably go with Allen in the end, as his party line votes support most of my larger agenda, but I'd like to go into a voting booth without needing noseplugs. Haven't since Reagan in 1984.

Another wonderful episode in the Virginia Senate race:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...103100948.html

Quote:

---

Democratic Activist Claims Abuse by Allen's Staffers

By Michael D. Shear and Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, November 1, 2006; Page A08

A Democratic activist who verbally confronted U.S. Sen. George Allen at a campaign rally in Charlottesville yesterday was shoved, put into a headlock and thrown against a window by three men wearing Allen stickers, according to a widely disseminated video of the incident.

W. Michael Stark, who identified himself in an e-mail after the incident as a University of Virginia law student, yelled a question at Allen (R) about whether he had ever spit on his first wife, an unsubstantiated charge that has been circulating on liberal blogs on the Internet. Allen supporters hauled him away from the senator as television cameras rolled.

"I demand that Senator Allen fire the staffers who beat up a constituent attempting to use his constitutional right to petition his government," Stark wrote in an e-mail.

---

If this keeps up, I'm moving to a more respectable state, like Florida. :laugh4:

Okay, that's it.

https://img285.imageshack.us/img285/50/gonzohb0.jpg

VOTE FREAK POWER!
BECAUSE IT'S BETTER THAN DEMOCRAP OR REPUBLICAN'T.

Anyone want to bet that this non-scandal wont get but the slightest write up in this weeks conservative rags? Anyone want to admit to jumping on the bandwagon, and having no idea about the popularity if Webbs books, the context of the quotes taken from them, or even knowing about Webbs credentials? Anyone? It's not even on Drudgereport anyone, it's now just a gasp of air from a dying campaign. That's okay, even I pop off and say stupid things sometimes.



Jim Webb, unusual democrat. Very much disliked the Deomcrats of the 70s. Hated Jane Fonda. Fought in Vietnam as a Marine Liuetenant and once shileded someone from an exploding grenade, earning himself some shrapnel in his head (its still there) and the Navy Cross. Got a Law Degree. Appointed Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Reagan Administration. Then became Secretary of the Navy. Liberalism of the 70s drove him from the Democrats. "Jimmy Carter made me a Republican" he once said. Also disdains Clinton, and would get pissed when clinton would salute a Marine. Refuses to shake hands with John Kerry, but supported him for President out of contempt for Bushs incompetencies in Iraq. Was right about Iraq, from dat one, where Allen was wrong. 6 months before bombs fell on Baghdad Webb described exactly what we would ( and now are) seeing in Iraq with the plan that was being touted at the time.

Had principled opposition to affirmative action and sexual integration of the military out of fear it would weaken the force, both of which he has backed down on. Defended the Navy during tailhook because it turned into a witch hunt. He's not pilitically correct. This the source of Allen launching ham headed quai-feminist attacks on Webb.

Webb's accomplishments should speak for themselves in regards to his abilities as a human being, even if you don't like his politics. Hmmm, take a scumbag who happens to be in your party because the guy running against him is an evil, evil conservative Democrat. That's right, reduce Webb's legacy to some uneasy fiction he wrote. And while your at it, visit the Mead Hall in the Guild Story forum and be sure and take everyone to account for the fiction they write there. K


BTW, I nominate Allen for the worst execution of a campaign this election season