ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Friday, October 27, 2006

Webb's Weird Willie Writings

Play guess the author at Drudge. Mark Foley?

Nope, Jim Webb.

So, it turns out that Jim Webb has some "inappropriate writings" of his own. And I seem to recall huge outrage over some creepy passages in a Scooter Libby novel... It's unfortunate that the Dems started this game - but, all is far in Love, War, and Politics. This is the new political battlefield that the Democrats have brought us. That and aggressively outing gays (see here, here, and here).

Now, on with the Webb story:

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:
Excerpts available at this link - caution rather graphic.

And when Sen Chris Dodd's response to this kerfluffle is that everyone's stupid for thinking that "[...] these races are about the candidates on the ballot..."

Ummmmm, has there ever been a more idiotic and delusional statement?

BTW, no interest in this bombshell by the Moonbat blogosphere. But I'll call what the spin will be from the left: "George Allen is for censorship!!"

Remember, you heard it here first.

*** UPDATE ***
Here is Glenn Reynolds' take and have to say that we here in the Conspiracy agree with him:
DIRTY PASSAGES IN JIM WEBB'S NOVELS: Not that big a deal to me -- they're novels -- but I suppose the Foley business has given this sort of thing more resonance than it would otherwise have. That sort of blowback doesn't seem all that unfair, though it's just another indicator of how lame the Webb/Allen race has been ever since Macacagate.

*** UPDATE 2 - St Wendeler ***
James Webb went on the air and discussed this issue. Here's what he said about one of the passages:
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.

The article quotes an office manager for the Cambodian Association of America, who described the act as a sign of respect or love.

"It's an exception," Thira Srey told the Review-Journal of the practice. According to the report, the act is usually performed by a mother or caretaker on a child who is one year old or younger. In Webb's novel, the child is four years old.

So... instead of the spin being that Allen is for censorship, Webb's spin is that Allen is culturally insensitive. (You were so close, Brian.)

All I have to say is that the way that this will be viewed by a majority of Virginia voters (ie, "Boy's Penis in Father's Mouth 'Not a Sexual Act,' Webb Tells Radio Host... ") won't help Webb's cause.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: Brian