Be Careful Waht You Write

[R. Richard]

If you are going to run for political office, be careful of what you write. The Democratic candidate, James H. Webb, is a writer who seems to want to explore underage sex, sometimes coupled with incest. The stuff that Webb writes could not be published in Literotica. It is amazing that the press hasn't lynched him. Comment?

The Virginia Senate election of 2006 will be held on November 7, 2006. The winner will serve from January 3, 2007, to January 3, 2013.

The incumbent, Republican George Allen, is running for a second term. He was previously governor of Virginia, and is considered a possible candidate for president in 2008.

The Democratic candidate, James H. Webb, is a writer and former Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Webb is a decorated Vietnam War veteran who beat IT lobbyist Harris Miller in the June 13, 2006 primary election.

Gail Parker, a businesswoman, retired Air Force officer, and retired Pentagon budget analyst, is running as the Independent Green Party candidate.

In early August, polls had Allen clearly in the lead, but Allen's lead was cut dramatically after he was videotaped on August 11 making what critics deemed a racially insensitive remark. Allen denied any prejudice in the comment.

ALLEN'S REVENGE: EXPOSES UNDERAGE SEX SCENES IN OPPONENT'S NOVELS
Thu Oct 26 2006 20:05:37 ET

Sen. George Allen, R-VA, unleashed a press release late Thursday that exposed his rival's fiction writing, which includes graphic underage sex scenes.

The press release, as provided by the Allen Campaign:

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 from those titles 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:

“Lost Soldiers” [Contains underage incest.]

“A Country Such as This”

“A Sense of Honor”

“Something to Die For”

“Fields of Fire” [Underage sex.]

 

[Zeb_Carter]

If you are going to run for political office, be careful of what you write. The Democratic candidate, James H. Webb, is a writer who seems to want to explore underage sex, sometimes coupled with incest. The stuff that Webb writes could not be published in Literotica. It is amazing that the press hasn't lynched him. Comment?

The Virginia Senate election of 2006 will be held on November 7, 2006. The winner will serve from January 3, 2007, to January 3, 2013.

The incumbent, Republican George Allen, is running for a second term. He was previously governor of Virginia, and is considered a possible candidate for president in 2008.

The Democratic candidate, James H. Webb, is a writer and former Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Webb is a decorated Vietnam War veteran who beat IT lobbyist Harris Miller in the June 13, 2006 primary election.

Gail Parker, a businesswoman, retired Air Force officer, and retired Pentagon budget analyst, is running as the Independent Green Party candidate.

In early August, polls had Allen clearly in the lead, but Allen's lead was cut dramatically after he was videotaped on August 11 making what critics deemed a racially insensitive remark. Allen denied any prejudice in the comment.

ALLEN'S REVENGE: EXPOSES UNDERAGE SEX SCENES IN OPPONENT'S NOVELS
Thu Oct 26 2006 20:05:37 ET

Sen. George Allen, R-VA, unleashed a press release late Thursday that exposed his rival's fiction writing, which includes graphic underage sex scenes.

The press release, as provided by the Allen Campaign:

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 from those titles 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:

“Lost Soldiers” [Contains underage incest.]

“A Country Such as This”

“A Sense of Honor”

“Something to Die For”

“Fields of Fire” [Underage sex.]

He's a Democrat!

 

[cloudy]

He's a Democrat!

And your point is....?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

And your point is....?

R.R. asked: It is amazing that the press hasn't lynched him. Comments?

I answered the implied question.

 

[cloudy]

R.R. asked: It is amazing that the press hasn't lynched him. Comments?

I answered the implied question.

Right. As usual, you don't have one, other than maligning people who believe differently than you.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Right. As usual, you don't have one, other than maligning people who believe differently than you.

And how did I malign him?

 

[Guest]

Hmm, John McCain endorsed a book some of the quotes are drawn from.

An opinion on a possible response from Webb is here.

The summary, the scenes described were scenes Webb saw while serving in Vietnam. Saying that, would remind the electorate Webb served his country, his opponent did not.

Fuel for thought and debate.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Right. As usual, you don't have one, other than maligning people who believe differently than you.

Mmmmm, no response as yet.

Tell me, exactly, how I maligned him Cloudy? I'm sure the Lit. peeps would just love to know.

 

[ungenderless]

Mmmmm, no response as yet.

Tell me, exactly, how I maligned him Cloudy? I'm sure the Lit. peeps would just love to know.

You know, it's possible that she just hasn't been online to answer your question since you asked it. I think what she means is that if your reason for him writing underage incestous porn is because *he's a Democrat*, then you are slandering him because that's an ugly stereotype with no foundation. Actually, what it seems like you are really slandering is the title Democrat; more specifically, everyone who is one.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

You know, it's possible that she just hasn't been online to answer your question since you asked it. I think what she means is that if your reason for him writing underage incestous porn is because *he's a Democrat*, then you are slandering him because that's an ugly stereotype with no foundation. Actually, what it seems like you are really slandering is the title Democrat; more specifically, everyone who is one.

Wrong! If you had read the prior post by me you would have seen that I was answering the question as to why the media hasn't racked him over the coals for what he wrote. So if anything I was accusing the media of giving a Democrat a break that they would never give a Republican. And therefore I never miligned Mr. Webb. As a matter of fact I never said anything that wasn't true. Mr. Webb is a Democrat and that's all I called him.

 

[jeninflorida]

Why would anyone want to run for office? lust, greed and power....okay, i see the point

If you are going to run for political office, be careful of what you write. The Democratic candidate, James H. Webb, is a writer who seems to want to explore underage sex, sometimes coupled with incest. The stuff that Webb writes could not be published in Literotica. It is amazing that the press hasn't lynched him. Comment?

The Virginia Senate election of 2006 will be held on November 7, 2006. The winner will serve from January 3, 2007, to January 3, 2013.

The incumbent, Republican George Allen, is running for a second term. He was previously governor of Virginia, and is considered a possible candidate for president in 2008.

The Democratic candidate, James H. Webb, is a writer and former Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Webb is a decorated Vietnam War veteran who beat IT lobbyist Harris Miller in the June 13, 2006 primary election.

Gail Parker, a businesswoman, retired Air Force officer, and retired Pentagon budget analyst, is running as the Independent Green Party candidate.

In early August, polls had Allen clearly in the lead, but Allen's lead was cut dramatically after he was videotaped on August 11 making what critics deemed a racially insensitive remark. Allen denied any prejudice in the comment.

ALLEN'S REVENGE: EXPOSES UNDERAGE SEX SCENES IN OPPONENT'S NOVELS
Thu Oct 26 2006 20:05:37 ET

Sen. George Allen, R-VA, unleashed a press release late Thursday that exposed his rival's fiction writing, which includes graphic underage sex scenes.

The press release, as provided by the Allen Campaign:

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 from those titles 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:

“Lost Soldiers” [Contains underage incest.]

“A Country Such as This”

“A Sense of Honor”

“Something to Die For”

“Fields of Fire” [Underage sex.]

 

[Alessia Brio]

Actually, what it seems like you are really slandering is the title Democrat; more specifically, everyone who is one.

Whereas, to me, the slam was directed at the media who, we allllllllll know is so far left leaning as to be incapable of accuracy. Except Fox, of course.

 

[Guest]

Whereas, to me, the slam was directed at the media who, we allllllllll know is so far left leaning as to be incapable of accuracy. Except Fox, of course.

And increasingly, ABC News.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I read Webb's "Fields of Fire," which I believe was to some extent a fictionalized memoir of his own Viet Nam experience. I thought it was excellent and touching, and that the person who wrote it was a good and thoughtful man. When Webb had the navy undersecretary position in the Reagan administration he appeared to confirm this impression by displaying a level of honesty, inegrity and candor which in that arena is more often seen in idealized fictional characters than in real life.

I think this attack on him is despicable.

There is a lot of blather about the lack of "civility" in public life. I say blather because most of the time that refers to officeholders struggling against their opposition on matters of public policy. In that sphere, "can't we all just get along" is a purile whine - no we can't, because we sincerely think our policies will be good for the nation, and the other side's policies will be bad.

Incivility becomes a legitimate complaint when politicians and parties substitute discourse on issues with assertions or insinuations that their opponents are not just misguided on policy, but are twisted, dishonest and evil people. It's disrespectul of voters, and bad for democracy. It also shows that the persons or party doing it lack the courage of their convictions.

 

[ungenderless]

Wrong! If you had read the prior post by me you would have seen that I was answering the question as to why the media hasn't racked him over the coals for what he wrote. So if anything I was accusing the media of giving a Democrat a break that they would never give a Republican. And therefore I never miligned Mr. Webb. As a matter of fact I never said anything that wasn't true. Mr. Webb is a Democrat and that's all I called him.

So you meant It is amazing that the press hasn't lynched him because he's a Democrat? Ok, I see now.

 

[oggbashan]

Dirtiest election ever?

The Times has an article today suggesting that the current US elections will be the dirtiest in terms of personal attacks ever.

From this side of the Atlantic is sure looks that way.

Og

 

[Guest]

Just saw this on a blog:

Webb just went on Washington Post radio to respond to the… charges? Allegations? He said, (very) roughly:

“That’s not a sexual act. I actually saw this happen in a slum of bangkok when I was there as a journalist. A man placing his lips on his son’s private parts, okay? …[A]nd the duty of a writer is to illuminate the surroundings. There’s nothing that’s been in any of my novels that hasn’t been illuminating the surroundings or defining the character or moving a plot. I’m a serious writer.”​

Maybe the reason the press hasn't attacked him, isn't that he's a Democrat, but because they see this as a desperate attack from an opponent who's squandered his double digit lead and is fighting for his political life?

 

[jeninflorida]

well you have to admit, 99% of the media is very liberal and would never blast a Democrat....what ever happened to the southern democrat that was busted during a sting with $80,000 in his freezer?

So you meant It is amazing that the press hasn't lynched him because he's a Democrat? Ok, I see now.

 

[Guest]

well you have to admit, 99% of the media is very liberal and would never blast a Democrat....

I don't admit. I'd not characterize Fox News, Rush Limbaugh's radio show, Hannity's radio show, the Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal editorial page etc. etc etc. as only 1% of the media.

And I'm not sure all the rest are liberal. Some are, as Fox et al is conservative, but many strive to be somewhat objective. It's just that politics has become so polarized in this country, that people often perceive anything as other than their own views, as being the opponents view.

The media was once more liberal than it is now. Continuing to label the media as a "liberal conspiracy" is a bogeyman perpetuated by conservatives because it is useful to them.

what ever happened to the southern democrat that was busted during a sting with $80,000 in his freezer?

The FBI continues to investigate. He's not escaped anything.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

The Times has an article today suggesting that the current US elections will be the dirtiest in terms of personal attacks ever.

From this side of the Atlantic is sure looks that way.

Og

Here is my biased interpretation: Republicans have gotten dirty (and are cynically pandering on issues like gay marriage and immigration) because in office they have abandoned their party's core issues of limited government, low taxes and fiscal conservatism. Democrats have been dirty for a long time because they know that in most districts it is impossible to get elected on the party's core issues of big government, higher taxes and more spending, so they try to convince voters that Republicans are evil. In the House, both parties are affected by the primary election dynamic created by having gerrymandered districts into one-party fiefs. The real election now takes place in the primaries, and R and D primary voters are much further left or right than the general electorate, especially on social issues.

 

[cloudy]

Here is my biased interpretation: Republicans have gotten dirty (and are cynically pandering on issues like gay marriage and immigration) because in office they have abandoned their party's core issues of limited government, low taxes and fiscal conservatism. Democrats have been dirty for a long time because they know that in most districts it is impossible to get elected on the party's core issues of big government, higher taxes and more spending, so they try to convince voters that Republicans are evil. In the House, both parties are affected by the primary election dynamic created by having gerrymandered districts into one-party fiefs. The real election now takes place in the primaries, and R and D primary voters are much further left or right than the general electorate, especially on social issues.

They've BOTH been dirty for a long time, not just Democrats.

In the Alabama Supreme Court race, the Republican party's attack on their opponent hasn't been on anything specific (because, to be honest, I don't think there IS anything they can attack), but the big announcement at the end of their ads is that she's a DEMOCRAT! *gasp*

 

[Guest]

Here is my biased interpretation: Republicans have gotten dirty (and are cynically pandering on issues like gay marriage and immigration) because in office they have abandoned their party's core issues of limited government, low taxes and fiscal conservatism. Democrats have been dirty for a long time because they know that in most districts it is impossible to get elected on the party's core issues of big government, higher taxes and more spending, so they try to convince voters that Republicans are evil. In the House, both parties are affected by the primary election dynamic created by having gerrymandered districts into one-party fiefs. The real election now takes place in the primaries, and R and D primary voters are much further left or right than the general electorate, especially on social issues.

Forgive me, Roxelby. That made me snicker.

 

[jeninflorida]

maybe she should have stated this differently, but i would agree that the dem are just as dirty as rep.

I don’t know the names, but was watching the news for a couple of minutes last weekend. The show had a round table with politicians and strategist of both parties. The topic came up of elected officials who have been busted for fraud and other crimes. The republican on the show stated that guilty politicians should not be eligible for his or her pension, but the democrats all rallied and stated that guilty politician’s must be eligible for his or her pension regardless of the crime.

I dont see how people can support a platform that wants more goverment and higher taxes.

Forgive me, Roxelby. That made me snicker.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I dont see how people can support a platform that wants more goverment and higher taxes.

It's true they've both been dirty for a long time. The names have changed, but the disagreements and dirtyness go back to at least 1796.

I think the point above is valid. Of course it's never described that way, but in terms of specific programs or policies that "help" people. And it's fair to say that it's also hard to support a (limited government) platform that necessarily must oppose programs and policies portrayed as or believed to be "helping" people. Hey, my first words in my last post acknowledged that I'm biased.

Actually, I almost wish I hadn't made that post, just because my first post on this thread says something that I think is kind of important, and the second probably has diverted us permanently into pointless partisan debate (which will no doubt be civil, though.)

 

[Athena_e19]

Any attempt at trying to draw a distinction between the parties based on name alone is worthless. Both of the major US parties receive their #1 funding from oil and pharmaceutical companies and private individuals who are directly connected from those companies.

Republicans do get the biggest bashing in the media by far. Fox is the biggest of the cable news networks because it is the only place where the right can go for a haven. The left have a bunch of stations that they can turn to (which is why their networks tend to be smaller and less pronounced).

I am pretty disgusted on the pass that we give Democrats however. The House Minority leader made 1.1 million on property that he had signed over, four years ago, to a friend when he was elected because it was a conflict of interest. There was a brief blurb on it in the news then nothing. I am less concerned about a dirty old man chatting up sixteen year old teen boys who can make informed decisions, then a dirty old man trying to fleece the government and the American public.

Up until recent elections I have voted Republican locally where they are socially moderate and fiscally conservative. As a gay individual, neither party is willing to stick their necks out. Civil unions are not an equal compromise, simply a cop out on behalf of Democrats.

I guess, what this rant is really about, is my desire to burn them all. We should start a Literotican party.