Democratic Senate Candidate from Virginia Flaunts Underage Sex Between Father/Son

Generally, links from tabloid websites are frowned down upon this BBS.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Soldiers-James-H-Webb/dp/B00006JO28

From Publishers Weekly
Webb's cultural and political portrayal of Vietnam 25 years after the war's end is delivered with such bold strokes and magical detail that it really doesn't matter that the plot itself is relegated to the backseat. This is a highly personal and empathetic look at today's Vietnam, a land of misery and inequity, yet one still vibrantly alive. The story follows the experiences of Brandon Condley, an ex-Marine whose job it is to find missing American soldiers, dead or alive. Condley is trying to track down Theodore Deville, an army grunt who not only deserted his unit in 1969 and killed a fellow serviceman, but then joined the ranks of the enemy. Condley is convinced Deville is still alive, operating somewhere in southeast Asia's underground economy. Webb introduces a rich cast of supporting characters as Condley pursues his quarry across Vietnam, Australia, the former Soviet Union and Thailand. Among the most delicately etched is Dzung, a former South Vietnamese officer now relegated, like thousands of others on the losing side, to a menial station in life, one that he and his family have no hope of escaping. Such characters, as well as the highly textured mood and atmosphere that Webb creates, tend to further eclipse the main narrative and shift the focus to the moral consequences and social fallout of the war. This detailed, lovingly drawn portrait of Vietnam reveals a sad, tortured country that has never recovered from the horrifying events of a quarter-century ago. Major print and radio advertising. (Sept. 4)Forecast: Webb (Fields of Fire) is no stranger to the bestseller lists; endorsements from heavy hitters like Sen. John McCain will help put him there once again.

 

TJ did you write that yourself or is that from the drudge report too? Your desperation is palpable.

 

TJ's post is understandable. Attacking the moral character of your opponent is apparently all the republicans have left.

The Year Of Playing Dirtier
Negative Ads Get Positively Surreal

By Michael Grunwald
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 27, 2006; A01


Rep. Ron Kind pays for sex!

Well, that's what the Republican challenger for his Wisconsin congressional seat, Paul R. Nelson, claims in new ads, the ones with "XXX" stamped across Kind's face.

It turns out that Kind -- along with more than 200 of his fellow hedonists in the House -- opposed an unsuccessful effort to stop the National Institutes of Health from pursuing peer-reviewed sex studies. According to Nelson's ads, the Democrat also wants to "let illegal aliens burn the American flag" and "allow convicted child molesters to enter this country."

To Nelson, that doesn't even qualify as negative campaigning.

"Negative campaigning is vicious personal attacks," he said in an interview. "This isn't personal at all."

By 2006 standards, maybe it isn't.

On the brink of what could be a power-shifting election, it is kitchen-sink time: Desperate candidates are throwing everything. While negative campaigning is a tradition in American politics, this year's version in many races has an eccentric shade, filled with allegations of moral bankruptcy and sexual perversion.

At the same time, the growth of "independent expenditures" by national parties and other groups has allowed candidates to distance themselves from distasteful attacks on their opponents, while blogs and YouTube have provided free distribution networks for eye-catching hatchet jobs.

"When the news is bad, the ads tend to be negative," said Shanto Iyengar, a Stanford professor who studies political advertising. "And the more negative the ad, the more likely it is to get free media coverage. So there's a big incentive to go to the extremes."

The result has been a carnival of ugly, especially on the GOP side, where operatives are trying to counter what polls show is a hostile political environment by casting opponents as fatally flawed characters. The National Republican Campaign Committee is spending more than 90 percent of its advertising budget on negative ads, according to GOP operatives, and the rest of the party seems to be following suit. A few examples of the "character issues" taking center stage two weeks before Election Day:


· In New York, the NRCC ran an ad accusing Democratic House candidate Michael A. Arcuri, a district attorney, of using taxpayer dollars for phone sex. "Hi, sexy," a dancing woman purrs. "You've reached the live, one-on-one fantasy line." It turns out that one of Arcuri's aides had tried to call the state Division of Criminal Justice, which had a number that was almost identical to that of a p*rn line. The misdial cost taxpayers $1.25.


· In Ohio, GOP gubernatorial candidate J. Kenneth Blackwell, trailing by more than 20 points in polls, has accused front-running Democratic Rep. Ted Strickland of protecting a former aide who was convicted in 1994 on a misdemeanor indecency charge. Blackwell's campaign is also warning voters through suggestive "push polls" that Strickland failed to support a resolution condemning sex between adults and children. Strickland, a psychiatrist, objected to a line suggesting that sexually abused children cannot have healthy relationships when they grow up.


· The Republican Party of Wisconsin distributed a mailing linking Democratic House candidate Steve Kagen to a convicted serial killer and child rapist. The supposed connection: The "bloodthirsty" attorney for the killer had also done legal work for Kagen.


· In two dozen congressional districts, a political action committee supported by a white Indianapolis businessman, J. Patrick Rooney, is running ads saying Democrats want to abort black babies. A voice says, "If you make a little mistake with one of your hos, you'll want to dispose of that problem tout de suite, no questions asked."


· In the most controversial recent ad, the Republican National Committee slammed Rep. Harold E. Ford Jr. (D-Tenn.) for attending a Playboy-sponsored Super Bowl party. In the ad, a scantily clad white actress winks as she reminisces about good times with Ford, who is black. That ad has been pulled, but the RNC has a new one saying Ford "wants to give the abortion pill to schoolchildren."

Some Democrats are playing rough, too. House candidate Chris Carney is running ads slamming the "family values" of Rep. Don Sherwood (R-Pa.), whose former mistress accused him of choking her. And House candidate Kirsten Gillibrand has an ad online ridiculing Rep. John E. Sweeney (R-N.Y.) for attending a late-night fraternity party. "What's a 50-year-old man doing at a frat party anyway?" one young woman asks, as a faux Sweeney boogies behind her to the Beastie Boys. "Totally creeping me out!" another responds.

But most harsh Democratic attacks have focused on the policies and performance of the GOP majority, trying to link Republicans to Bush, the unpopular war in Iraq and the scandals involving former representative Mark Foley and former lobbyist Jack Abramoff. That is not surprising, given that polls show two-thirds of the electorate thinks the country is going in the wrong direction. And studies show that negative ads can reduce turnout; Democrats hope a constant drumbeat of scandal, Iraq and "stay the course" will persuade conservatives to stay home on Nov. 7.

It is harder for Republicans to blame out-of-power Democrats for the current state of Washington, but they are equally eager to depress Democratic turnout and fire up their conservative base. One GOP strategy has been raising the specter of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco liberal, becoming speaker; for example, Rep. John N. Hostettler (R-Ind.) is airing radio ads warning that a Democratic victory would allow Pelosi to "put in motion her radical plan to advance the homosexual agenda." Then again, Hostettler's opponent, Democrat Brad Ellsworth, has accused him of promoting the sale of guns to criminals, "including child-rapists."

Some of this year's negative ads are more substantive, reprising a successful Republican strategy from 2002 and 2004: portraying Democrats as soft on terrorism. For example, Rep. Nancy L. Johnson (R-Conn.) has an ad lambasting her opponent for opposing Bush's efforts to conduct wiretaps without search warrants. A host of Democrats have been accused of trying to "cut and run" in Iraq -- including House candidate Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, who lost both legs in Iraq.

The RNC has raised eyebrows with an ad consisting almost entirely of al-Qaeda videos starring Osama bin Laden and his top deputies. There is no sound except the ticking of a bomb before the final warning: "These are the stakes. Vote November 7th." John G. Geer, a Vanderbilt professor who has written a book defending negative political ads, said he told a well-connected Republican friend in Washington that the ticking-bomb ploy seemed like a desperation move. The friend e-mailed back: "John, we're desperate!"

"Look, the electorate is polarized, the stakes are large, and neither party has much to run on right now," Geer said. "You can expect to see some pretty outlandish ads."

The "pays for sex" ad against Kind in Wisconsin -- along with a similar one aired against Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) -- may be the most extreme. It says Kind spent tax dollars to study "the sex lives of Vietnamese prostitutes" and "the masturbation habits of old men" and "to pay teenage girls to watch pornographic movies with probes connected to their genitalia." Cue the punch line: "Ron Kind pays for sex, but not for soldiers." The Wisconsin Republican Party denounced the ad, and several TV stations refused to air it, but that only got it more attention. It is the centerpiece of Nelson's Web site: "This ad is so powerful, a sitting U.S. Congressman threatened TV stations with legal action if they dared to play it."

Kind joked in an interview that he has been paying for sex ever since he said "I do." But on a more serious note, he said Nelson's attack ad is typical of modern politics, in which desperate candidates can attract media coverage and rally their base with distortion. He opposed the amendment in question -- as did many Republicans -- because he does not think Congress should interfere in peer-reviewed NIH studies, not because of any interest in teenage genitalia. That particular study, incidentally, had nothing to do with teenagers.

"Man, it's a crazy system, and it's getting worse every year," Kind said. "We rip each other to shreds, and then we're all supposed to come back to Washington and try to work together. It's a hell of a way to elect representatives."

At least it is clear who is responsible for Nelson's ad: Nelson. The Playboy ad bashing Ford, on the other hand, is a typical product of the attack politics of 2006. Its beneficiary, GOP Senate candidate Bob Corker, called it "tacky" but said he cannot do anything about an RNC ad. Even RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman said he is powerless to stop it; it is an "independent expenditure" of the RNC, out of the committee's control. He doesn't seem too upset about it, though. Corker has been rising in the polls since it started airing.

Experts say that in the past, negative ads were usually more accurate, better documented and more informative than positive ads; there was a higher burden of proof. Stanford's Iyengar thinks that is still true for candidate-funded messages, which now require candidates to say they approved them. But it is not true when the messages are produced by political parties, shadowy independent groups or partisans posting on YouTube.

"You're going to see more of this sensational, off-the-wall stuff," Iyengar said. "If you get people disgusted, they might withdraw from politics, and that's the real goal these days."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601811.html

 

I think it's pathetic desperation, but this should backfire, this specific attack. If anyone has paid attention to this Virginia campaign (rather than rely on Matt Drudge for news) you would know that Webb has barely mentioned his military service...definitely not to the extent that John Kerry did in his campaign, and with this attack he will be forced to. His novel was about the hideous poverty and moral decay that was Vietnam during war and still was a quarter of a century later. Allen's attack would reaffirm the fact that he never went to Vietnam (receiving a "student deferment" like so many of the elite) and could not possibly understand the horrors of real war and how third world countries look.

By questioning Webb’s mentality on this, he is also questioning every Vietnam veteran who saw gruesome stuff as well. There is a reason why many veterans from that war complimented him on that book, including John McCain. If Webb is not even allowed to talk about what went on there, and what still might go on there, then what does that say about the rest of the people that fought there…or even those that are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan? Are all veterans who have to live with these nightmares too mentally unstable to serve their country at home?

You would also have to question Allen’s own thinking on this considering he thought that passage was meant to titillate. Was Allen turned on by it? It seems like it was supposed to depict the depravity that still exists in Vietnam. If Allen’s people saw something else in there then maybe they should go get themselves checked out.

So what will it be? Insulting Webb, a Marine who earned the Navy Cross, Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, and two purple hearts for his country and other veterans who come home and live with this **** for the rest of their lives...including Webb's son. Or will Allen reveal that it confuses him when people write about disgusting sexual acts because he gets turned on by everything and can't differentiate between eroticism and sexual abuse.

We shall see...

 

This is so bad, I smell TJ's desperation from here. The only sad thing is, is that it reflects poorly on his patriotism. When he accuses Dems of rooting for the enemy, his attempts to divide a nation at war and in a struggle to preserve our constitution show that he like some others put his political party in a higher priority than our nation.

 

T_J is desperate but not serious...like an old fat Adam Ant....

 

Of course...

Anyone who supports Webb by any measure supports incest and sexual molestation.

Why could I not see the logic there?

 

hey if you don't succeed, post and post again..

 

Do you feel proud of yourself reducing democracy like this with your win at all costs philosophy? You aren't an American anymore....certainly not a patriot...you're just a Republican.

 

BigSexxxyTexxy just couldn't stay away, so he jumped into his Trader_Jorge persona.

How ridiculous.

 

This is barely even funny these days. There is no father performing oral sex on his son. Do you know what fiction is?

Did you know that in the bible it talks about incest as well? Yet I hear GOP folks "defend" the bible all the time.

I must say that you have slipped considerably since your time off from this forum. We can treat this thread like a preseason warm up for you. Hopefully you shake the rust off soon.

 

gay-baiting anyone?

 

As usual, you prove yourself the biggest idiot this board has ever seen.

Nobody has "defend[ed] a father performing oral sex on his young son" in any way, shape, or form, and you know it. This is a freaking novel for crying out loud and one that has been lauded by a lot of people including John McCain.

BTW, it is the REPUBLICANS who have recently covered up for a man who has admitted to ACTUALLY having inappropriate relationships with underage boys, rather than simply writing a novel that includes one disgusting description (taken out of context, BTW) among several hundred pages.

Keep coming back, t_j, I have missed trouncing your "arguments." LOL

 

What is interesting about this smear attempt by George Allen and Matt Drudge is that it must mean Allen's internal polls showed him trailing. Most of the public polls had him ahead, though within the margin of error, but an attack of this nature must mean they thought they were behind.

This is not the sort of move you make if you feel you will win.

 

Grasping at straws, anyone?

 

tradertexx, i agree that it is pretty screwed up and i do think it is fair game in a tight political race, but where was the outrage with bill o'reilly's book "those who tresspass"? his main character, 'robo' is a pimp who smokes crack and has sex with two 15 year old girls. did you start a thread about that too? do you still watch the factor?

"hey baby, why dont you put down that pipe and come lift up mine".

now i know you will say loofa-boy isnt a public official, but what about 'scooter' libby? he wrote a book called "the apprentice" where young girls in training are forced to have sex with a caged bear.

"At age ten the madam put the child in a cage with a bear trained to couple with young girls so the girls would be frigid and not fall in love with their patrons. They fed her through the bars and aroused the bear with a stick when it seemed to lose interest."

did you start a thread about that too - if not one might think that you are a bit of a hypocrite.

in the end, if i have to chose b/t someone who writes perverted novels and someone who has a trackrecord of serious racism ill take the pervert.

 

[redacted screenname] (7:40:44 PM): got kicked off?

Maf54 (7:41:24 PM): must have

[redacted screenname] (7:41:57 PM): ugh tomorrow i have the first day of lacrosse practice

Maf54 (7:42:27 PM): love to watch that

Maf54 (7:42:33 PM): those great legs running

[redacted screenname] (7:42:38 PM): haha...they arent great

[redacted screenname] (7:42:45 PM): thats why we have conditioning

[redacted screenname] (7:42:56 PM): 2 days running....3 days lifting

[redacted screenname] (7:43:11 PM): every week

[redacted screenname] (7:43:14 PM): until the end of march

Maf54 (7:43:27 PM): well dont ruin my mental picture

[redacted screenname] (7:43:32 PM): oh lol...sorry

Maf54 (7:43:54 PM): nice

Maf54 (7:43:54 PM): youll be way hot then

[redacted screenname] (7:44:01 PM): haha...hopefully

Maf54 (7:44:22 PM): better be

Maf54 (7:46:01 PM): well I better let you go do oyur thing

[redacted screenname] (7:46:07 PM): oh ok

[redacted screenname] (7:46:11 PM): have fun campaigning

[redacted screenname] (7:46:17 PM): or however you spell it

[redacted screenname] (7:46:18 PM): lol

[redacted screenname] (7:46:25 PM): ill see ya in a couple of weeks

Maf54 (7:46:33 PM): did any girl give you a haand job this weekend

[redacted screenname] (7:46:38 PM): lol no

[redacted screenname] (7:46:40 PM): im single right now

[redacted screenname] (7:46:57 PM): my last gf and i broke up a few weeks agi

Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): are you

Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny

[redacted screenname] (7:47:29 PM): lol...a bit

Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself

[redacted screenname] (7:48:04 PM): no

[redacted screenname] (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy

Maf54 (7:48:33 PM): wow...

Maf54 (7:48:34 PM): i am never to busy haha

[redacted screenname] (7:48:51 PM): haha

Maf54 (7:50:02 PM): or tired..helps me sleep

[redacted screenname] (7:50:15 PM): thats true

[redacted screenname] (7:50:36 PM): havent been having a problem with sleep though.. i just walk in the door and collapse well at least this weekend

Maf54 (7:50:56 PM): i am sure

[redacted screenname] (7:50:57 PM): i dont do it very often normally though

Maf54 (7:51:11 PM): why not

Maf54 (7:51:22 PM): at your age seems like it would be daily

[redacted screenname] (7:51:57 PM): not me

[redacted screenname] (7:52:01 PM): im not a horn dog

[redacted screenname] (7:52:07 PM): maybe 2 or 3 times a week

Maf54 (7:52:20 PM): thats a good number

Maf54 (7:52:27 PM): in the shower

[redacted screenname] (7:52:36 PM): actually usually i dont do it in the shower

[redacted screenname] (7:52:42 PM): just cause i shower in the morning

[redacted screenname] (7:52:47 PM): and quickly

Maf54 (7:52:50 PM): in the bed

[redacted screenname] (7:52:59 PM): i get up at 530 and am outta the house by 610

[redacted screenname] (7:53:03 PM): eh ya

Maf54 (7:53:24 PM): on your back

[redacted screenname] (7:53:30 PM): no face down

Maf54 (7:53:32 PM): love details

[redacted screenname] (7:53:34 PM): lol

[redacted screenname] (7:53:36 PM): i see that

[redacted screenname] (7:53:37 PM): lol

Maf54 (7:53:39 PM): really

Maf54 (7:53:54 PM): do you really do it face down

[redacted screenname] (7:54:03 PM): ya

Maf54 (7:54:13 PM): kneeling

[redacted screenname] (7:54:31 PM): well i dont use my hand...i use the bed itself

Maf54 (7:54:31 PM): where do you unload it

[redacted screenname] (7:54:36 PM): towel

Maf54 (7:54:43 PM): really

Maf54 (7:55:02 PM): completely naked?

[redacted screenname] (7:55:12 PM): well ya

Maf54 (7:55:21 PM): very nice

[redacted screenname] (7:55:24 PM): lol

Maf54 (7:55:51 PM): cute butt bouncing in the air

[redacted screenname] (7:56:00 PM): haha

[redacted screenname] (7:56:05 PM): well ive never watched myslef

[redacted screenname] (7:56:08 PM): but ya i guess

Maf54 (7:56:18 PM): i am sure not

Maf54 (7:56:22 PM): hmmm

Maf54 (7:56:30 PM): great visual

Maf54 (7:56:39 PM): i may try that


[redacted screenname] (7:56:43 PM): it works

Maf54 (7:56:51 PM): hmm

Maf54 (7:56:57 PM): sound inetersting

Maf54 (7:57:05 PM): i always use lotion and the hand

Maf54 (7:57:10 PM): but who knows

[redacted screenname] (7:57:24 PM): i dont use lotion...takes too much time to clean up

[redacted screenname] (7:57:37 PM): with a towel you can just wipe off....and go

Maf54 (7:57:38 PM): lol

Maf54 (7:57:45 PM): where do you throw the towel

[redacted screenname] (7:57:48 PM): but you cant work it too hard....or its not good

[redacted screenname] (7:57:51 PM): in the laundry

Maf54 (7:58:16 PM): just kinda slow rubbing

[redacted screenname] (7:58:23 PM): ya....

[redacted screenname] (7:58:32 PM): or youll rub yourslef raw

Maf54 (7:58:37 PM): well I have aa totally stiff wood now

[redacted screenname] (7:58:40 PM): cause the towell isnt very soft

Maf54 (7:58:44 PM): i bet..taht would hurt

[redacted screenname] (7:58:50 PM): but you cn find something softer than a towell i guess

Maf54 (7:58:59 PM): but it must feel great spirting on the towel

[redacted screenname] (7:59:06 PM): ya

Maf54 (7:59:29 PM): wow

Maf54 (7:59:48 PM): is your little guy limp...or growing

[redacted screenname] (7:59:54 PM): eh growing

Maf54 (8:00:00 PM): hmm

Maf54 (8:00:12 PM): so you got a stiff one now

[redacted screenname] (8:00:19 PM): not that fast

[redacted screenname] (8:00:20 PM): hey

[redacted screenname] (8:00:32 PM): so you have a fetich

Maf54 (8:00:32 PM): hey what

[redacted screenname] (8:00:40 PM): fetish**

Maf54 (8:00:43 PM): like

Maf54 (8:00:53 PM): i like steamroom

Maf54 (8:01:04 PM): whats yours

[redacted screenname] (8:01:09 PM): its kinda weird

[redacted screenname] (8:01:14 PM): lol

Maf54 (8:01:21 PM): i am hard as a rock..so tell me when your reaches rock

[redacted screenname] (8:01:23 PM): i have a cast fetish

Maf54 (8:01:27 PM): well tell me

Maf54 (8:01:32 PM): cast

[redacted screenname] (8:01:44 PM): ya like...plaster cast

Maf54 (8:01:49 PM): ok..so what happens

Maf54 (8:01:58 PM): how does that turn you in

[redacted screenname] (8:02:02 PM): i dont know

[redacted screenname] (8:02:04 PM): it just does

[redacted screenname] (8:02:08 PM): ive never had one

[redacted screenname] (8:02:16 PM): but people that have them turn me on

[redacted screenname] (8:02:27 PM): and if i had one it would probably turn me on

[redacted screenname] (8:02:29 PM): beats me

[redacted screenname] (8:02:32 PM): its kinda weird

[redacted screenname] (8:02:50 PM): but along with that i like the whole catholic girl look....thats our schools uniform

Maf54 (8:03:02 PM): ha thats wild

[redacted screenname] (8:03:14 PM): ya but now im hard

Maf54 (8:03:32 PM): me 2

Maf54 (8:03:42 PM): cast got you going

Maf54 (8:03:47 PM): what you wearing

[redacted screenname] (8:04:04 PM): normal clothes

[redacted screenname] (8:04:09 PM): tshirt and shorts

Maf54 (8:04:17 PM): um so a big buldge

[redacted screenname] (8:04:35 PM): ya

Maf54 (8:04:45 PM): um

Maf54 (8:04:58 PM): love to slip them off of you

[redacted screenname] (8:05:08 PM): haha

Maf54 (8:05:53 PM): and gram the one eyed snake

Maf54 (8:06:13 PM): grab

[redacted screenname] (8:06:53 PM): not tonight...dont get to excited

Maf54 (8:07:12 PM): well your hard

[redacted screenname] (8:07:45 PM): that is true

Maf54 (8:08:03 PM): and a little horny

[redacted screenname] (8:08:11 PM): and also tru

Maf54 (8:08:31 PM): get a ruler and measure it for me

[redacted screenname] (8:08:38 PM): ive already told you that

Maf54 (8:08:47 PM): tell me again

[redacted screenname] (8:08:49 PM): 7 and 1/2

Maf54 (8:09:04 PM): ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Maf54 (8:09:08 PM): beautiful

[redacted screenname] (8:09:38 PM): lol

Maf54 (8:09:44 PM): thats a great size

[redacted screenname] (8:10:00 PM): thank you

Maf54 (8:10:22 PM): still stiff

[redacted screenname] (8:10:28 PM): ya

Maf54 (8:10:40 PM): take it out

[redacted screenname] (8:10:54 PM): brb...my mom is yelling

Maf54 (8:11:06 PM): ok

[redacted screenname] (8:14:02 PM): back

Maf54 (8:14:37 PM): cool hope se didnt see any thing

[redacted screenname] (8:14:54 PM): no no

[redacted screenname] (8:14:59 PM): she is computer dumb though

[redacted screenname] (8:15:01 PM): it makes me so mad

Maf54 (8:15:04 PM): good

Maf54 (8:15:08 PM): haha