How crude was that!

[JackLuis]

I was browsing the blogosphere and found a short piece which I thought crude. Considering my situation, I ask what authors think of this type of article?

12/08/2010 The Rude Pundant
Senate Republicans Have a Celebration Orgy:

The Senate Republican cloakroom was filled with whores yesterday. No, not the senators themselves, who were taking the afternoon off from letting the Chamber of Commerce sodomize them, the better for their assholes to regain some elasticity. There were real, actual, non-metaphorical prostitutes there, female and male, paid for by Karl Rove's American Crossroads GPS and its billionaire donors. Not only would the organization's funds be written off by the rich men and women who just got a tax cut, but the organization could write off the hookers as a business expense. And so here was a big cocksucking "thank you" for this win-win-win, just the way Republicans like compromises to work.

Just what is being cloaked in that cloakroom?

 

[sr71plt]

Yep, pretty crude.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Even for a political blog, it was pretty crude. It may have even been actionable as slander, but I doubt that will ever happen.

 

[R. Richard]

Even for a political blog, it was pretty crude. It may have even been actionable as slander, but I doubt that will ever happen.

Libel is written defamation. Slander is verbal defamation.

 

[sr71plt]

Even for a political blog, it was pretty crude. It may have even been actionable as slander, but I doubt that will ever happen.

Who did it slander? Is there someone by the name of Republican Cloakroom?

 

[Bebeslut]

I was browsing the blogosphere and found a short piece which I thought crude. Considering my situation, I ask what authors think of this type of article?





Just what is being cloaked in that cloakroom?

Do we even know this actually happened?
As far as who it libeled, I would say Karl Rove.

 

[JackLuis]

Do we even know this actually happened?
As far as who it libeled, I would say Karl Rove.

Well then that's hardly slander then, Karl can laugh it off, unlike some thin skinned Senators.

 

[sr71plt]

Well then that's hardly slander then, Karl can laugh it off, unlike some thin skinned Senators.

Not only that, but libel/slander laws don't protect someone in the public light like Rove is like they do a Joe Schmo citizen.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Who did it slander? Is there someone by the name of Republican Cloakroom?

If you read the second and subsequent paragraphs of the article, you would see it described a drug and sex orgy and mentioned names. Even so, this would probably not be actionable as slander or libel because nobody could possibly believe it to be true.

 

[sr71plt]

If you read the second and subsequent paragraphs of the article, you would see it described a drug and sex orgy and mentioned names. Even so, this would probably not be actionable as slander or libel because nobody could possibly believe it to be true.

Why on earth would I want to read the second and subsequent paragraphs?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Not only that, but libel/slander laws don't protect someone in the public light like Rove is like they do a Joe Schmo citizen.

They do, but to a lesser degree. You still can't always get away with telling outrageous lies about a person just because that person is a public figure. A few celebrities, Carol Burnett for one, have sued scandal magazines and won because of the lies told about them.

In this case, since nobody would ever believe the things said in the second and subsequent paragraphs, the writer would probably get away with it.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
If you read the second and subsequent paragraphs of the article, you would see it described a drug and sex orgy and mentioned names. Even so, this would probably not be actionable as slander or libel because nobody could possibly believe it to be true.

Why on earth would I want to read the second and subsequent paragraphs?

So you wouldn't look stupid and uninformed and appear to be a person who shot off his mouth (keyboard?) without knowing what he was tallking (writing?)about.

 

[sr71plt]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
If you read the second and subsequent paragraphs of the article, you would see it described a drug and sex orgy and mentioned names. Even so, this would probably not be actionable as slander or libel because nobody could possibly believe it to be true.




So you wouldn't look stupid and uninformed and appear to be a person who shot off his mouth (keyboard?) without knowing what he was tallking (writing?)about.

Frankly I didn't even see that there was more to the article. So, I was being unaware even before I had the chance to shoot off my mouth without knowing what I was talking about.

 

[JackLuis]

Common curtest is that when you call someone cock sucking drug addict you at least smile when you say it.

plt, the underline signifies a link to the main article.

I generally like the Rude Pundit, but occasionally he goes ape shit, about Republicans.