Redstate

I actually hope Webb's defense of the man-boy stuff is that he witnessed it in Vietnam or interviewed someone who did. Because if he just plain made it up...

It may be fiction, but it is disgusting low, low, low fiction. There are much better things to write about. Good writing doesn't have to include sleezy stuff like that. What it does is gives you insight into the moral character of Web, what he things about, etc. I wouldn't let my dog sleep in the same room as him.

Just to riff on the title of this post: Webb is a "Pedophile Fatasizer" [sic], since one of his characters performed a act between child and adult involving genitalia.
For all those down thread who said that this author and that isn't on the ballot, well, Newt Gingrich was on a few Republican ballots. And may be again. So does writing a book "fantasizing" about how the South could won the Civil War make Newt unfit for office?
By the logic shown in this post re: "Pedophile Fantasizer", I assume Newt could be called a "Confederacy Supporter" by the outraged people on this thread, since he impeccably researched and wrote a by-all-accounts extremely detailed book about how Gettysburg could have been won by the South. Surely a man who wanted the South to win the civil war is out of touch with the people of this country, and as the posts here show, an author's subject matter and character actions reveals innermost yearnings of the heart.
I confidently await the condemnation of Newt as a Republican candidate.

Newt hasn't written a book about how the South won the war. One volume in his alternative history trilogy does describe a victory at Gettysburg, of sorts because the main battle takes place in Westminster, MD, but in the end none of it matters and the South loses.

might be right. I didn't say he wrote a book about how the South won the war. I said he wrote an alternate history where the South won at Gettysburg. He did. By the logic of this thread, that shows what he thinks, about, or fantasizes about, and apparently reveals something about his moral character.
Some review comments from Gringrich's Gettysburg:
* This well-executed alternative history imagines a Confederate victory at Gettysburg.
* The novel has a narrative drive and vigor that makes the climactic battle scene a real masterpiece of its kind (it's not for the weak of stomach).
* An eye-opener...filled with gore, smoke, heat of battle and a surprise ending.

So, continuing to use the logic of this thread, Gingrich imagines the South won Gettysburg, writes prose not for the weak of stomach, and writes gore. Does this have relevance to his candidacies, past or future?

First, that isn't what you said.

And may be again. So does writing a book "fantasizing" about how the South could won the Civil War make Newt unfit for office?

It didn't happen. There is no fantasizing about the South winning at all. You'd have to be familiar with Michael Shaara's work to understand what he's doing but that would have entailed reading.

Surely a man who wanted the South to win the civil war is out of touch with the people of this country,

Again, just not true. His thesis is that by winning Gettysburg Lee still must return South, Lincoln brings Grant east sooner and the war ends earlier.

So instead of having the guts to simply admit you aren't even vaguely conversant with the books you continue to make stuff up.

Not good enough, friend. Go peddle this crap elsewhere.

of historical "what if" writing. Alternative history writing is a fascinating way of looking at how sometimes minor events in history can have far reaching effects on future events.

Heck, I was working on an alternative history piece in which Algore won the 2000 election and was respondible for prosecution of the GWoT>

God help anyone who suggests that I wanted such a chilling event to happen!

See The World In HinzSight!

Heck, I was working on an alternative history piece in which Algore won the 2000 election and was respondible for prosecution of the GWoT

"Alternative history?" "Fiction" I am not certain there is a word in the English language that properly describes that situation :-)

John
--------
Democratic civilization is the first in history to blame itself because another power is trying to destroy it.
... Jean-François Revel

See The World In HinzSight!

written about the Pipe Creek Line and what a move away from G'burg on or after the first day would have entailed and how the battle might have been fought. Gingrich and Forester were far from the first nor will they be the last to write about it. It goes all the way back to the Longstreet v. Early memoir wars of the 1880s. Gingrich and Forester (think that's the co-writer's name) just put together a very readable "faction" piece on what has been an ongoing discussion for 140 years. Stick to stuff you know something about.

In Vino Veritas

It's sick.

If this seat can't be won on the merits of the issues and the qualifications of the candidates, then it does not deserve to be won.

Well said. If this seat cannot be won on the merits of the issues and qualification of the candidates, then it does not deserve to be won.

--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

have.sex.with.that.woman.Miss.Lewinsky." Well, I can certainly see how Democrats would know fiction when they see it.

John
--------
Democratic civilization is the first in history to blame itself because another power is trying to destroy it.
... Jean-François Revel

seats always deserve to be won, and you don't have to win pretty for the win to count.

Personally, I think this is an issue that goes directly to Webb's character. I don't think I am alone here, even a lefty like Don Imus thinks so. Webb's campaign has had to devote a couple of days to addressing this. Live by macaca, die by incestuous pederasty.

nt

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200610/PO...

It isn't very thorough, but it's all I've got.

Link via Drudge.

Perhaps, but you do see a lot of this sort of thing in Stephen King's writing. Granted he's a horror writer, but somehow I can't get very worked up about this.

I'm a big fan of SK and have failed to see this kind of garbage in it...

"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself

Um...hate to break this to you but there is a fair amount of man-boy sex in King's work. I'm a huge fan of the guy and have read everything he's written - I think it comes up so often because he's a horror writer and this is obviously something that most people do find horrific. A few examples:

Tommyknockers: There is a very graphic scene of a father having anal sex with his sons (age 10 and 7).

The Library Policeman: A graphic rape scene of a small boy outside a library.

The Dark Tower 3 - The Waste Lands: A mutated old pervert expresses the desire to have sex with Jake - the Gunslinger's 12 year old sidekick.

There are other examples - I don't really feel like trying to remember them. Again, I think King is just trying to shock his readers - and in my case at least he succeeded. I like his writing, but sometimes he does go a tad overboard, but I suppose a horror writer is supposed to do that. I don't want him to run for office because he's a liberal, but I don't know that it would be fair to hold this sort of thing against him if he did.

Anne Rice, author of the Vampire Chronicles, "Interview With a Vampire", wrote stuff like this. I made it through about 4 of her books, the 5th one was just too much and I couldn't get around the weirdness to the rest of the story so I dropped em.

The weirdest thing Stephen Kings done is describe some buttsex aftermath in Shawshank Redemption, when he says something to the effect of using TP after gettin raped in prison.

Webb's stories are just freakin weird.

Frankly, my post above only touched on some of King's rather graphic descriptions of sex acts involving children. With Rice, most of the time she's talking about adults having sex (or biting each other, anyway)

Is one that I have read several ties and I think I must have gotten an edited (read: censored) copy, because that's just not in it...
...Unless you're mistaken...

"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself

that this is non-sexual, it will backfire on Allen.

Otherwise game over.

Only Bill Clinton would believe the described act was "non-sexual". Gimme a break.

If you really think it's non-sexual, I would suggest that you attempt the described act in a public place (since it apparently took place in a public place) and see what happens. Don't plan on bail being reasonable.

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

If a Cambodian father puts his son's penis in his mouth, there's no way it can be described as non-sexual.

Webb had a theoretically defensibly argument that fiction includes behavior which the author doesn't approve of. However today Webb went off the deep end beyond recovery, with his ridiculous claim that his portrayal of the Cambodian father fellating his own son was "not a sexual act."

Webb is trying to hide the truth about that by lying about a custom among some Cambodians, where a mother might put her mouth on the penis of her infant son as a gesture of "respect". As I understand it, the mother is acknowledging that as a male her son is one who's will she will submit to when he's older. As bizarre and sexist as that is, it could be accurately described as non-sexual.

That sexist custom of female submission can't be used as a "non-sexual" explanation for a Cambodian man doing that to a young boy, so obvously Webb is lying.

Pure and simple. There's occasionally a backlash -- the Michael J. Fox ads might ignite one -- but so long as they're not too dirty and they're targeted right (for example, the NAACP James Byrd ads may have annoyed whites but it worked with its target audience, poor blacks), they'll usually work.

I read the CNS News piece on Webb's interview with Washington Post Radio, and, to be honest, Webb came across to me as something of a victim. Don't misunderstand, I despise victim politics; however, when Webb sits there explaining that the content of his novels is not appropriate for talk radio (as is the content of many works of fiction) and the host reads the excerpts anyway, it really casts his attackers in a bad light and may have the effect of inspiring pity for him. George Allen is going to have a more difficult time explaining the dissemination of this material (especially in light of his plea to campaign strictly on the issues) than Jim Webb will have explaining away a few passages in his perfectly legal, adult-oriented novels.

Jim Webb readily admits the content of his gritty war novels is inappropriate for broad public consumption, and George Allen’s campaign has foisted that inappropriate content upon the American public. Today, parents are going to have to have conversations with their children about women who take their clothes off for money doing naughty things with produce and unseemly customs of Cambodian parents. I feel sorry for those parents. Their children would not have stopped by the neighborhood bookstore for a copy of “Something to Die For” of their own volition.

People concerned with the corruption of youth and the general degradation of American culture are going to have a major bone to pick with Senator Allen, and they may very well take it out on him at the polls. I pray that doesn’t happen because I believe Republicans need to maintain control of Congress to prevent the dispossession of our country and the dismantling of our valued institutions in the hands of activist judges.

try that down at your local mall with your kid and find out if it is sexual or not

He observed it. In a slum. In Thailand.

Not at the Mall in Peoria.

Are you saying we should hold a different standard for Thai slum-dwellers?
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

Whether it was a depraved sexual act isn't the point. He observed this event, and used it in his fiction. That's what fiction writers do. Big whoop.

you were arguing originally that it wasn't a sexual act now you're saying that whether it was a depraved sexual act or not (I say fellating your son is, but just call me old fashioned). Which is it?

Is it not a sexual act or does it just not matter so long as he's a Dem?

people right about depraved acts in fiction, often to describe depraved actions...

You seem to assume it's supposed to be titilating, but that is a very odd assumption, really.

I'm not fond of Webb myself, and I won't defend him as I'm not interested in finding out the context and all the rest of this stuff... but you really do have to acknowledge that a novelist writing about something you find horrid can happen because the novelist also finds it horrid, and is using a horrid situation to convey something about the situations he writes about.

I think you can still argue, and probably will, that it shows that Webb is willing to go somewhere in his fiction that you do not approve of, and that this reflects on Webb as a candidate.

But you should stop pretending that it's some sort of advocacy, when more likely it's a normal novelist trick to manipulate the emotions of the reader.

-pyrrho

I don't.

There are limits a moral person should establish on their activities. When they can't or won't set limits for themselves it calls into question their own character. I think pretending Nobokov was not a sick puppy is self-delusion. Ditto for Webb as the story would not have suffered for the deletion of this passage, the story was not advanced by its inclusion, and the act is not a normal, traditional greeting in that culture.

So one has to ask why it was included?

The obvious answer is that it is gratuitous and meant to titillate or horrify

Then the question becomes why would Webb pick this example as something to horrify when it is an incident encountered en passant and typically scenes that horrify in novels eventually have to be resolved in some way and this isn't. But what if it was there to titillate? What does that tell us about Webb? Lots. A boat load, as a matter of fact.

I mean, I think it's there to horrify and the un-titilating sexual aspect is a part of that, it's fair to hold it against them in whatever manner you hold such things against novelists.

It's also fair to give it a pass by poetic license, or alternately to allow Webb to respond and take the response into account... everyone will weigh it differently... I certainly understand why you have weighed it the way you have.

-pyrrho

of Thai slum dwellers in any way related to Webb's qualifications for office? One of the characters in one of his books acted in a manner consistent with something Webb observed -- so what, what does that have to do with Webb as a candidate?

I mean honestly.

This book shows Webb to be weird. The fact that he chose to explain this act in the level of detail that he did, shows that he's not TREATING this act like some routine social event for these people.

Just like you don't mention the gun over the fireplace unless the gun is to go off, you don't describe every step of this greeting unless it's somehow important.

The only defense I can think of here, is that Webb is merely a horrible, horrible writer, who is totally incapable of distinguishing the important from the unimportant in his writing.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

your defense of Scooter Libby. If you think writing craptacular fiction disqualifies one from serving in a high public office, where do you come down on his vision of bestiality/rape/torture, in which a girl is kept in a cage and violated repeatedly by a bear to prepare her for prostitution?

This sprung from Libby'e fervent imagination - he wasn't inspired by an event in the world around him.

--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

anywhere? If not this is just a silly comment.

http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

there is no evidence that this is common or acceptable behavior in Thailand. Webb says he saw it once, not that "gee, everybody in Thailand greets their kid this way."

I don't know what this has to do with Webb the candidate but I do know that it speaks volumes for Webb the man.

difference between what and what? This is probably my fault for jumping into the middle of a thread but I can't tell what you're responding to here.

I haven't read Webb's books but suppose there are characters in those books that murder people -- does that also reflect on Webb?

If one is inclined to judge Webb for actions committed by characters in his novels then IMO it ought to matter where he came up with the idea for some of these, ah, weird scenes.

Some people will consider this a big deal and some won't -- that's politics. I certainly don't think there's anything wrong with mentioning it, Webb should have known it would come up. Personally I think it's a bit desparate to attack a candidate for his novels but maybe the Allen campaign's focus-group testing indicates this will play well in VA.

to you the difference between a literary plot device that has been used since Gilgamesh, murder, and the act under discussion then this conversation really is worth the effort of continuing.

No one is trying to force you to condone the act under discussion. If you feel like Webb even including this thing he witnessed in one of his books is creepy then bully for you, don't vote for him. Just don't be surprised when other people who choose not to disqualify a candidate based on a passage from a work of fiction are disinclined to cede the moral high ground to you.

the difference between a novel and creepy.

she is mortified that someone would say, write, or much less do this.
_________________________________________________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes

and I've seen things in both places that would probably make even Webb blush. I don't write about them, I don't talk about them, I try really hard to never think about them because there's just no place - or should be no place - for perversion like Webb describes in anyone's life. Period.

The fact that "it happened and he saw it" is nothing more than simple minded foolishness. Where it occured is not an issue.

Frankly, my only question would be why, assuming he's telling the truth about what he saw, why he didn't smack the offending adult in the head with a baseball bat and rescue the kid. I'm more outraged that it was a real incident and he didn't have the decency to stop it.

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

I've observed a lot of things in bars in Tijuana, Berlin, and Grafenwoehr that might be seen in a slum in Thailand but I would never describe them as "not sexual" and I probably wouldn't put them in a book.

If you want to believe that fellating your son isn't sexual that is your prerogative but don't be surprised while the rest of us laugh in your face.

what about the "Woman Loves Banana" scene? Was that non-sexual too? Or the guy that brags about his exploits with Miss Goodbody, but can't remember her name?

The bad news: Conservatism is hard to sell. The good news is that it works.

that was athleticism. I've witnessed things close enough to that scene that I'd be willing to say that it was non-sexual in nature.

Webb picked the right party.
"I did not have sex with that women.." B.Clinton
"It was not a sexual act" J.Webb

It's not that he wrote about it in a work of fiction, but his opinion that it "wasn't a sexual act" that disqualifies him from any position of authority.

He's seriously twisted and needs to back to what ever rock he has been hiding under for the past decade.

Bye Jim -

Si vis Pacem, Para Bellum

I think he still was a republican when he was writing some of this stuff, not that that really matters unless you want to say that this is what Democrats get for accepting former Republicans in their party.

-pyrrho

isn't on the ballot in Virginia, is he?

These comments make Virginia sound like a state devoutly to be avoided. I'm as conservative as hell, but I'm damned if I think that means I have to fulfill the left-wing cartoon of conservatives as unlettered dolts.

And that's a gentle hint, which will turn into a firm instruction if you try to push the issue.

And I normally don't bring this up: but if you want to impress people with your erudition, it helps if you check your spelling before you hit the Post Comment button.

Moe

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

Which word(s) mispelled, please?

and philistinism not philestinism

only because you asked.

Just as every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners saints - Sympathy for the Democrats

...but my heart was in the right place.

--
"I will guarantee you that John Kerry will be president of the United States." - Nancy Pelosi

Although that last might have been just wit.

Mind you, this is Moe's First Law: Any attempt to demonstrate one's superior intelligence online will result in at least one serious, and uncaught, spelling error in the text in question.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

Thank you--you're right.

...there are two misspellings in this sentence alone:

"...I'd be embarassed my supporters run to such philestinism."

--
"I will guarantee you that John Kerry will be president of the United States." - Nancy Pelosi

Not piling on. Only because you asked.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

On behalf of all Virginians, thanks Moe.

Please don't discourage him to avoid the Commonwealth of Virginia, however.

-----------
Even those who learn from history are surrounded by those doomed to repeat it.

...Clancy, Grisham and Brown are apt comparisons.

If you're trying to impress the room with your literary acumen, you might mention Vladimir Nabokov, William Faulkner and James Dickey (all fine writers, although I wouldn't vote to put any of them in public office).

If you're trying to win brownie points with your college reading circle, you might say something like, "the Bible's supposed to be about real life".

--
"I will guarantee you that John Kerry will be president of the United States." - Nancy Pelosi

I don't remember many of the perpetrators running for office. Frankly, if I am remembering correctly most did not last in this life too long.

Thanks for providing the perfect metaphorical situation for Webb. Appropriately, he will fade like the pages of some old book, not even to be vaguely referenced on Wikipedia.

"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"

This is interesting, I think. I've read the Bible, and I've read a great deal of classic authors. And I must say that there's a distinct difference between the two.

For instance, a suicidal author writing about a woman getting raped with a corncob is not fit to be a senator. I mean, according to any objective standard, we shouldn't be electing suicidal people to the senate.

Then there's this issue: writing about corncob rape or Cambodian penile insertion goes to the issue of what the writer's thought life consists of. People spending their time thinking and writing about these things are not the type of people I wante representing me. Mainly, that's because I don't trust people who spend their spare time thinking about corncob rape and putting child's penis in a man's mouth.

That is in stark contrast to the way the Bible treats such issues. Those writers wrote about such things to condemn those acts. In law school, I had to write an answer to an essay question about a rape. After I wrote that answer, I didn't go home and dwell on raping women. Likewise, the writers of the Bible brought up such things to show how wrong they are, and how offensive they are to God. They did NOT write about such things merely to depict real life. And no objective reading of the Bible would yield to your description of it.

Lastly, when I brought up Grisham and Rice, I was trying to think of people of Webb's stature, and who are of Webb's political persuasion. Surely you don't think he's a Faulkner do you, or even a Nabokov? If so, then I suggest you take a course in literary criticism.

Sola Gratia

You are simply making it look once again the dems coverup and never do anything wrong, while Republicans are always at fault.

This is not an argument over art, although for my money Webb's writing is garbage. But I'm sure your mileage differs.

This is about a writer of stuff offensive to a fair size of the voting electorate, running for public office. Running for the U.S. Senate!

I don't mean to imply that the Senate and House aren't full of amoral scumbags; I'm quite certain they are, and I take a backseat to no one in my general disgust with politicians. But don't be throwing your vile mental masturbations in my face and then ask me to vote for you - it ain't gonna happen.

Webb can write whatever he wants. I have a strong suspicion he'll have plenty of time to write his salacious novels after Nov. 7.

I'm as well read as you are. Which is why I feel very comfortable in saying there's a difference between literature and the stuff you get at the XXX bookstore.

What, for example, is the literary merit of the banana scene described in Something to die for, page 36.

Here's the link, if you want to read it:

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashaw.htm

And by the way, if you think Lolita is one of the greatest novels of the 20th century, well, let's just say I question your taste. It's a whole book written about child molestation, and there's no way to dress it up any differently. I didn't see anything aesthetically redeeming in it when I read it for an introductory lit class several years ago. If that makes me a philistine, then so be it.

For my part, I never jump on the "ban the books" bandwagon. If you like reading Something to die for or Lolita for that matter, I say "fine, that's why we have a free country." But don't expect the rest of us philistines to vote for people like Nabokov or the Webb if they ever run for office, because frankly, they creep us out.

A precedent embalms a principle.
- Disraeli

http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Too true.

Already know how Webb would vote on pending legislation regarding child porn since, in his opinion, the act described in his book isn't sex.
I bet money is flowing into his campaign from the porn industry.

Si vis Pacem, Para Bellum

About Webb's fiction I'm frankly indifferent, even when it's in reference to the current Virginia election. But this website was not created to give you the opportunity to practice your wit at the perceived expense of the other commenters here; and if you persist in pretending that it was then you will be politely but firmly shown the door.

Understand?

Moe

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

"Practice my wit"? Here? It would get a better workout in the Bronx Zoo.

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

It's the first stop after 99th Street. By subway, try the #2 or the #5 to Pelham Parkway; go to Lydig Ave via White Plains. Make a right on Lydig and another on Bronx Park East, then a quick left onto Boston Road and go under the underpass to Gate B. By car, well, good luck.

If you get lost, feel free to consult this.

Have a nice day!

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

n/t

Did he get trampled by elephants or was he just outwitted by foxes?

Either way, he was playing possum with his real intentions and now swimming with the fishes.

"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"

It cannot be defended that he saw it? Or that he wrote about it after he saw it? Which act is beyond your moral pale?

1. That he thought it might be appropriate in any context that did not show the act to be a vile desecration (sp?) of the child and the adult to be a complete pervert.
2. That he thinks the passage in question is non-sexual.

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

I guess I need to go through it again.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

Sola Gratia

Intensely aggravating without making any obvious breach of the rules...
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

we've learned a lesson in that regard and one flyerhawk is quite enough.

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

I think perhaps you are reading too much into my words. I think this nation deserves much better from BOTH sides of the aisle.

I, for one, am sick of the nasty campaign tactics that do nothing but serve the redmeat to the already decided.

With all the critical issues that Virginia, and this nation, face I find it very sad that our politics is about sex, innuendo, race, and rumor.

I don't live in Virginia, but if I did, I would be voting for George Allen, because I vote Republican always.

I admittedly lean to the more libertarian side of viewpoints, but I'm a realist. Regardless of the my disagreement with the GOP on some issues and tactics, they are far and away my choice over the Democrats.

I browse this site regularly because I enjoy the intelligent, fairly static free discourse. I don't agree with many things I see posted here, but I have never attacked anyone here. I don't invest that much emotion in cyberworld.

If my opinion offended, I'm sorry, but I can't believe than any of you honestly see these sort of campaign tactics as good. FWIW, Webb is a recipient of the Navy Cross, the second highest award for bravery. Granted, his fiction sucks, but I think the man deserves the benefit of the doubt on such a manufactured "issue". The Virginians will make their decision on 11/7, and it will be because of the real issues, both local and national, not the hair-on-fire reactions of some Allen folks over an old novel.

Some people can't read Democratic Underground without having a fit. I can't watch most any television news without blowing up...
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

Good calming experience.

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

and it makes morons.

It might sound more convincing if you had wondered why the Webb campaign had not stuck with the issues, instead of throwing ever shovel of muck they could find at Allen. What does the religion of Allens grandfather have to do with the issues facing the United States? That was clearly an attack born out of desperation on the part of the WaPo and the Dems.

Now all of a sudden the Democrats suddenly wonder why the issues are not more important. Are you aware of your own hypocrisy?

...you're saying if you'd seen this, it wouldn't have left an impression on you?
What an exciting life you must lead!

I think the Allen campaign stepped on a mine on this one. They went for the character - which can work, and can be the right move sometimes - and now Webb's gonna talk about his 'harrowing Vietnam days' for the next week. And (unlike with Kerry) it will now seem 'relevent'.

If Allen loses this, just when he was really developing a lead.... well, whoever made that choice will have a hard time getting another job.

You are cool with the monkey-faced stuff and the racial slur for blacks as well. If you've heard that in the past and it made an impression on you, there can't be anything racist about using the same lingo yourself, unless you are a Republican.
---
"I am a great believer in luck. The harder I work, the more I have of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

We don't gain by my ragging on this campaign any more, so after this post I'll do the honorable thing and can it.

But I think Allen has been very badly advised (to be charitable), and if he loses, I'll be right back here spitting blood.

I can't believe they would open the door for
a) Webb to talk about 'character' (i.e. his Vietnam decorations etc), and
b) people to paint Allen as a 'book-burner'.

I only pray the backlash from this is minimal. If you want to debate be more on this, sorry, it'll have to be after the election.