Senator George Allen Watch: Webb Says Boy’s Penis in Father’s Mouth “Not a Sexual Act”

Democratic US Senate candidate Jim Webb speaks at a town hall meeting in October, 2006 in Springfield, Virginia. Republicans seeking to overcome racism accusations clouding Senator George Allen claimed his opponent Jim Webb was guilty of past discrimination against women military recruits.

CNS News: Webb Says His Novels ‘Inappropriate’ for News Radio

Among the excerpts is a scene from the 2002 novel “Lost Soldiers,” in which a man embraces his four-year-old son and places the boy’s penis in his mouth.

Webb said the release of the excerpts was “a Karl Rove campaign tactic” and a “classic example of the way this campaign has worked. It’s smear after smear.”

He defended his fiction as “illuminative.”

“It’s not a sexual act,” Webb told Plotkin regarding the “Lost Soldiers” excerpt. “I actually saw this happen in a slum in Bangkok when I was there as a journalist.”

“The duty of a writer is to illuminate his surroundings,” he added.

Coincidentally, a Cambodian woman in Las Vegas is facing sexual assault charges for performing a similar act on her young son, according to an Oct. 14 report in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Good grief…..this guy is a PERV!

Allah has the audio and some ~~excuses~~ explanations.

And remember that story about him going hunting for “Coons” in Watts while he was a student at USC.

Too much just does not add up for James Webb. Sure, George Allen lost his temper and called a mullet headed kid a “MACACA” but Webb crosses the line with this sexual stuff.

Next, Webb will insist Slick did not have sex with that woman – Lewinsky.

Senator George Allen Watch: James Webbâ€™s Weird World

Senator George Allen Watch: The N-Word FLAP – A Democrat Dirty Trick SET UP

Senator George Allen Watch: The N-Word FLAP

James Webb Watch: Nancy Reagan Demands Webb PULL Fraudulent Campaign Ad Featuring Ronald Reagan

Senator George Allen Watch: Webb NOW leads Allen in Latest Poll

Senator George Allen Watch: Allen Apologizes for Offensive Remarks – FLAP Part II

Senator George Allen Watch: Allen Apologizes for Offensive Remarks – FLAP

Technorati Tags: GeorgeAllen, JimWebb

5 Comments

molasky

October 27, 2006 at 1:30 pm

it’s not. it really happened in the situation the story is based on. do you your homework if you want to be taken seriously. this smear campaign is pathetic.

Flap

October 27, 2006 at 1:48 pm

What a joke. The left was all over Allen with Macaca and now are trying to cover up Webb’s writings.

Hey, I printed what Webb said and my comments are my comments. I, even linked to Allah who has a different take.

But, all is fair in politics, right?

molasky

October 28, 2006 at 12:30 am

“Hey, I printed what Webb said and my comments are my comments”

I wasn’t referring to his comment, which is obviously in your post, but to the nature of the ritual he witnessed in the culture he witnessed it. You highlight in your headline that it somehow outrageous or at least noteworthy for him to say it is “not a sexual act”, but you do not address that question at all. That’s what I meant. It’s no joke.

“But, all is fair in politics, right?”

Not sure what you mean, unless you are saying that unfair attacks on Webb are ok as long as there are unfair attacks on Allen too. If you are implying that you realize that these attacks are baseless, then I urge you not to jump in only out of a thirst for ‘scanadal revenge.’ Whether or not all is ‘fair’ is a separate question from right and wrong.

In what sense does Webb “cross the line”? As you know by now, it is a fictionalized account of experiences in frightening and depressing environments. The book is not designed to ‘promote’ the behavior of Thai slum dwellers, but expose it.

The books have been in the public for the entire campaign and have been widely read before it began. This is designed by Allen simply to be dropped late enough to shock people who won’t learn the type of book this was before the election.

Flap

October 28, 2006 at 7:31 am

Spin Spin Spin

My head is spinning for your use of all of the Webb campaign’s talking points.

If it is NO big deal why is Webb and his minions going out among the blogs to set the story right.

I quoted accurately what James Webb said and what he has done in his writings and campaign reflects on his character.

molasky

October 28, 2006 at 10:29 am

“talking points” and “spin”?

Take a look at your own post. You do not say whay ANY of your conclusions are true. You take a line “not a sexual act” then try to assert that somehow this “reflect on his character”. That’s spin. If you said why this did so, it might approach an argument.

Now, your implied argument is that by merely mentioning a Southeast Asian ritual in a novel, he is unfit to be a senator. He “crosses the line with this sexual stuff.” If the sotry in your own post about the Cambodian woman doesn’t mean anything to you, take a look at the following account of the practice more generally:

http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/GUS/GUSVOLIICH9.HTM

The only possible basis for your outrage, as I see it, is that he somehow created this from his imagination and wrote it for his own sick enjoyment (please illuminate if there is some other argument here). But you know now that it is not from his imagination, but from an actual event that is an ongoing practice.

That being the case, how does it reflect on his character? That is precisely your undefended claim — your ‘spin’. If this is something that someone in SE asia would encounter, and clearly it is, and it is a story about someone in SE asia, what EXACTLY does it say about is character that he chose to mention it when trying to show the bizarreness that surrounds a a character in the situation? How does it say he is a “perv”?

The difference between spin and argument is that the former relies on sophistry. If my point sounds like Webb’s “talking points”, it is only because he also knows the basic facts that would prevent anyone from coming to the conclusion that there is something wrong with the authors of books that tell the story of sad and disturbing scenes in developing countries coupled with abhorrent traditional practices.

I don’t care about Jim Webb — he was going to lose anyway — but this is the kind of attack that we should all agree is unacceptable. Think for just a moment about all your blog posts or other writings, and if someone applied this reasoning to your own work. Have you ever told a story about something horrible that you witnessed? Maybe not, but a lot of people have, and they certainly are not unfit for public office as a result.

I appreciate that you take the time to respond, and your open policy for comments, but I wonder if you can answer my question above (why this passage, as you know understand it, or his response reflects on the character of the writer and makes him a “perv”) without mentioning Allen or ‘liberals’ or ‘talking points’ or simply dismissing me.

Just for fun, also imagine if it were Allen or another republican who had written fictionalized recountings of their war experiences–including disturbing scenes–in widely praised books; and that some ‘cut and run’ democrats had accused him of being a “perv” as a result. I have a hard time believing that there is even a single republican who would agree with that assessment.

As for why it is a ‘big deal’. That is obviously because of Allen’s timing in doing this. If the Webb campaign does not respond, the election will come before honest people have a chance to learn the context. Six months ago there would have been no need to respond with any urgency.

Thanks for your time and forum

molasky

October 27, 2006 at 1:30 pm

it’s not. it really happened in the situation the story is based on. do you your homework if you want to be taken seriously. this smear campaign is pathetic.
Flap

October 27, 2006 at 1:48 pm

What a joke. The left was all over Allen with Macaca and now are trying to cover up Webb’s writings.

Hey, I printed what Webb said and my comments are my comments. I, even linked to Allah who has a different take.

But, all is fair in politics, right?
molasky

October 28, 2006 at 12:30 am

“Hey, I printed what Webb said and my comments are my comments”

I wasn’t referring to his comment, which is obviously in your post, but to the nature of the ritual he witnessed in the culture he witnessed it. You highlight in your headline that it somehow outrageous or at least noteworthy for him to say it is “not a sexual act”, but you do not address that question at all. That’s what I meant. It’s no joke.

“But, all is fair in politics, right?”

Not sure what you mean, unless you are saying that unfair attacks on Webb are ok as long as there are unfair attacks on Allen too. If you are implying that you realize that these attacks are baseless, then I urge you not to jump in only out of a thirst for ‘scanadal revenge.’ Whether or not all is ‘fair’ is a separate question from right and wrong.

In what sense does Webb “cross the line”? As you know by now, it is a fictionalized account of experiences in frightening and depressing environments. The book is not designed to ‘promote’ the behavior of Thai slum dwellers, but expose it.

The books have been in the public for the entire campaign and have been widely read before it began. This is designed by Allen simply to be dropped late enough to shock people who won’t learn the type of book this was before the election.
Flap

October 28, 2006 at 7:31 am

Spin Spin Spin

My head is spinning for your use of all of the Webb campaign’s talking points.

If it is NO big deal why is Webb and his minions going out among the blogs to set the story right.

I quoted accurately what James Webb said and what he has done in his writings and campaign reflects on his character.
molasky

October 28, 2006 at 10:29 am

“talking points” and “spin”?

Take a look at your own post. You do not say whay ANY of your conclusions are true. You take a line “not a sexual act” then try to assert that somehow this “reflect on his character”. That’s spin. If you said why this did so, it might approach an argument.

Now, your implied argument is that by merely mentioning a Southeast Asian ritual in a novel, he is unfit to be a senator. He “crosses the line with this sexual stuff.” If the sotry in your own post about the Cambodian woman doesn’t mean anything to you, take a look at the following account of the practice more generally:

http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/GUS/GUSVOLIICH9.HTM

The only possible basis for your outrage, as I see it, is that he somehow created this from his imagination and wrote it for his own sick enjoyment (please illuminate if there is some other argument here). But you know now that it is not from his imagination, but from an actual event that is an ongoing practice.

That being the case, how does it reflect on his character? That is precisely your undefended claim — your ‘spin’. If this is something that someone in SE asia would encounter, and clearly it is, and it is a story about someone in SE asia, what EXACTLY does it say about is character that he chose to mention it when trying to show the bizarreness that surrounds a a character in the situation? How does it say he is a “perv”?

The difference between spin and argument is that the former relies on sophistry. If my point sounds like Webb’s “talking points”, it is only because he also knows the basic facts that would prevent anyone from coming to the conclusion that there is something wrong with the authors of books that tell the story of sad and disturbing scenes in developing countries coupled with abhorrent traditional practices.

I don’t care about Jim Webb — he was going to lose anyway — but this is the kind of attack that we should all agree is unacceptable. Think for just a moment about all your blog posts or other writings, and if someone applied this reasoning to your own work. Have you ever told a story about something horrible that you witnessed? Maybe not, but a lot of people have, and they certainly are not unfit for public office as a result.

I appreciate that you take the time to respond, and your open policy for comments, but I wonder if you can answer my question above (why this passage, as you know understand it, or his response reflects on the character of the writer and makes him a “perv”) without mentioning Allen or ‘liberals’ or ‘talking points’ or simply dismissing me.

Just for fun, also imagine if it were Allen or another republican who had written fictionalized recountings of their war experiences–including disturbing scenes–in widely praised books; and that some ‘cut and run’ democrats had accused him of being a “perv” as a result. I have a hard time believing that there is even a single republican who would agree with that assessment.

As for why it is a ‘big deal’. That is obviously because of Allen’s timing in doing this. If the Webb campaign does not respond, the election will come before honest people have a chance to learn the context. Six months ago there would have been no need to respond with any urgency.

Thanks for your time and forum