September 29th, 2009

The rape of innocence

The reaction of no small number of pundits on the Left to the Polanski case is to recommend that we let bygones be bygones. After all, he’s a famous artist, has lived a long life, the offense occurred ages ago, the victim wants to drop it—and after all she was a 13-year old sexually active temptress at the time.

In answer to those who wonder what’s up with these people, I submit the following explanations for their point of view:

(1) moral relativism run amok. There are no objective standards of behavior. Who are we to judge, anyway?

(2) worship of the elite by the elite, or the would-be elite (see also this)

(3) the sexualization of children. You can see it everywhere: fashion, entertainment, and in any school in town. And yes, it’s a very slippery slope.

(4) the desire to be seen as a spiritually evolved human being, a forgiving sort who is far above the primitive desire of others for revenge and retribution rather than peace and love (it’s so Old Testament, you know)

(5) the end of the idea that society is a player in the game, an entity with an interest in setting standards for human behavior

[ADDENDUM: And why does this development somehow not surprise me? But thank goodness the rank and file liberals at HuffPo and Salon don’t happen to agree with their journalist “betters” that Polanski should be let off the hook.]

66 Responses to “The rape of innocence”

  1. Gray Says:

    (6) They wanna have sex with kids.

  2. Artfldgr Says:

    Socialists andCommunists have no compass for right and wrong, have no compassion for anybody, recognize no legality outside their perceptions, in general are unable to debate honestly and listen to arguments of others and in their perverted minds in whatever the argument may be their side is always right and the opponent is always wrong. That is the Nazi way which I have felt.


    In America there are thousands of grass root groups, ministries, organizations, newspapers and television and radio stations who fight a moral battle against this or that moral perversion, violation of constitutional norms, bureaucratic and government abuses and so on. Those partisans are fighting honorable and necessary battles but they are not fighting the war. They don’t understand that the real issue is not morality but global power. Morality is the battlefield where the war is being waged and decided. The morals of a president, or of the members of Congress, for instance, decide whether power is being excised within the order of God’s commandments or by arbitrary judgements of immoral almighty man defying God. It is irrelevant whether almighty man goes to church and pretends to be or thinks he is a believer. Don’t look at the mouth, look at the acts.


    If you want to eliminate the power of God in a nation in order to take over yourself the only way to do that is to launch false philosophies and implement laws which destroy the connections of people to His moral commandments and entice people to give in to their lusts and ambitions.

    the desire to be seen as a spiritually evolved human being, a forgiving sort who is far above the primitive desire of others for revenge and retribution rather than peace and love – NEO

    What we Germans thought was greatness was blind pride before the fall. And the fall was terrible. I know what comes of the complacency of the millions of bystanders who can’t kill a fly but stand up for nothing.

    Hilmar Von Campe

  3. Ymarsakar Says:

    Congress isn’t satisfied with male and female prostitutes. They need a greater variety of clientelle. And they can’t simply go to the Middle East or Russia to partake of the snuff-sex shots, either.

    THey want to do it in the convenience of their home, here, now.

    I try to remember every drop of blood that they have on their hands. So that I’ll have a long list of reasons to give them, once they beg for mercy and I refuse to give it.

  4. Tim P Says:

    Let there be nomistake, Polanski is a child rapist. He plead guilty and he should face the time. Also, the public outrage at the moral mutants on the left is justified and understandable.

    However, I’d like to pose this passing thought on.

    Consider within the last month that Obama skipped Poland’s 70th anniversary remembrance of the Nazi invasion which triggered WWII. He also scrapped the missile defence of eastern Europe by cancelling the deployment of said missile defense equipment to Poland. Notably, this abandonment was made public on the 70th anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Poland. Incompetance or calculated insult?

    Now we have the surprising arrest of Polanski. Yes, he deserves what he gets, but what if maybe, just maybe it was a clever move by Obama to further alienate an ally? After all the Polish government was surprised and outraged by this arrest. Ask Ann Applebaum.

    At the same time Obama gets a freebie in the fact that the right supported missle defense deployment in Poland and the left did not. Now the right supports Planski’s prosecution and the left does not. This effectively ailienates both sides of the American political spectrum in Poland’s eyes.

    Why else arrest Polanski now? You get to further ailienate an soon to be former ally, exacerbate political differences at home and all the while making sure the Poles like the right no more than the left. Bonus! Oh and to also distract attention from the ACORN/SEIU and other debacles at home.

    Just a passing thought…

  5. Ymarsakar Says:

    You would need individual actors for that theory, Tim. Ideas don’t become reality through wishes. People have to make them happen.

    Without those people, those ideas don’t exist except in people’s heads.

  6. GeoPal Says:

    (7) To the liberal left the measure of a man/woman is their celebrity (see #2) and victimhood. Polanski is a twofer – two for the price of one.

  7. Artfldgr Says:

    and about bystanders… us.. who sit and talk and never do anything. i dont mean go out and riot, but we do nothing other than try to be reasonable.

    i guess hux and others dont remember this (of course not, they dont read me. though they do try to marginalize me)

    remember this post:
    I told him that most people look at the criminals when trying to figure out how it was possible, that such evil could happen in a cultured nation like Germany. They should look, however, at the real culprits, the bystanders like me, who allowed evil to dominate. from the threat of totalitarianism. AIM REPORT | BY HILMAR VON CAMPE | JULY 16, 2009

    right now, they stopped people from getting out the similarities to totalitarianism as not reasonable. and so to be reasonable, hux and a few others, sought to be voices of reason, when leaders were unreasonable.

    as i said. they dont want to learn how it happened, they want to stumble onto it.

    people dont realize that its not the monsters that make this happen, its the good towns people who do nothing to remove the monsters, hold them accountable, say good intentions are not enouhg, and so on.

    will anyone go back and read it, to see how relevent it is now?

    There is a global ideological war going on. The United States of America is the principal target. America is the last bastion of freedom in the world but we are in very bad shape as a nation. Our “leaders” do not face the issue. Our government believes or pretends that there is no such war and does not define the enemy. Many people don’t even understand that they are being attacked.
    The battlefield is morality: truth vs. lies. There is no neutrality-you can only be on one side or the other.

    all from that last post…
    jon baker Says: A writer I sometimes read, Marv Rosenthal, in the last issue of “Zion’s Fire” also spoke of the morality change in Germany before WW2.

    it was a VERY decadent time compared to other times. cabarets… sleaze… pedophilism (gross mach)…

    we even celebrated that era here! but we didnt realize that when we saw the josephine baker (shug avery) story, did we?

    here is a pic of her from that era:
    Negro singer Josephine Baker is banned from Munich stage for “indecent public behavior.”

    that was the time when Germany accepted the Kellogg-Briand Pact where they made the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy.

    the play Cabaret glorifies that decadent period just before hitler. we revisit it, copy it, all pretend to be a part of it, and yet we have no idea of the history we pantomime when we are having so much fun copying its portrayal making us want the same thing.

    they went through many of the same things we did.

    a big sudden problem with Cocaine… destroyed the family, etc… anyone remember Anita Berber.

    we mimic and copy, and we step in the shoes of people we do not know.

    Dancer and Actress, Prostitute and Drug Addict, Lost Girl and Wild Woman.
    Expressionist exotic Dancer and Actress in German Silent Movies, “Anita Berber” epitomized for many the Decadence of Weimar-Era Berlin (1918-1933). However, recent Scholars have re-evaluated Her as an Icon of unfettered Sexuality and a Precursor of modern Day Performance Artists.

    ah… so we ARE doing the same things…
    see how a person that epitomized the decadence of that era, was reformed to be something to emulate in the west.

    who cares why? and what that emulation leads to. she was the courtney love, and britany spears of her time. a time that glorified prostitution… drugs, and perverse sex…

    it was the franfurt school that did it to them as it did the same thing here! (hitler kicked them out and they settled in columbia, home of the teachers school).

    It was as a Dancer that “Berber” plied her most celebrated Skills and incurred her greatest Notoriety. She brought flamboyant Eroticism, exotic Costuming, and grotesque Imagery to Performances, danced to the Music of Composers such as “Debussy”, “Strauss”, “Delibes”, and “Saint-Säens”. A Pioneer of modern Expressive Dance, “Berber” was at first taken seriously as an Artist, but soon became better known for her scandalous personal and professional Life.

    that parallels our entertainment now… doesnt it?

    as i said, those that dont know, fill in the blanks with whatever they make up, the way that primitives invented spirits and magic to do the same.

    Over time “Berber’s” Performances grew increasingly macabre, as if intended purely for Shock Value. Having come to be considered vulgar by Sophisticates, the Dancer increasingly socialized in Gay Circles and with a rough Crowd that included Boxers and Prostitutes. She was also Friends with ??? Researcher “Magnus Hirschfeld”.
    “Berber’s” Cocaine Addiction and Bisexuality were Matters of Public Chatter. Her short-lived 1919 Marriage to a wealthy Acquaintance was preceded and followed by publicly-known Lesbian Relationships.

    a real Angelina Jolie, eh?

    In a famous Portrait of Her made about this time by “Otto Dix”, “Berber” is depicted as a strikingly erotic, almost Vampire like, Drug addicted “Scarlet Whore of Berlin,” far older than her Mid-Twenties. This Portrait, perhaps more than any other Image of “Berber”, has solidified her Reputation as the Epitome of Weimar-Era Decadence.

    According to one Witness to her Funeral, prominent Film Directors marched beside the Whores of “Friedrichstrasse”, young male Hookers with Hermaphrodites from the “El Dorado”, famous Artists next to Barmen, Men in Top-Hats beside the most famous Transvestites of Berlin. Her Burial became a public Function, a Farewell to the local Saint of Whoredom; the “Weimar Republic” and Berlin’s wild Days would not last much longer.
    “Anita Berber” inhabited the low-brow Margins of Society as well as its high strung artistic Scene. At her Funeral Members of both Groups rubbed Shoulders, in what was perhaps “Berber’s” final Transgression of Boundaries.

    so what our famous people doing with chavez, and so forth… is just a repeat of germany during weimar. just as the hyperinflation soon to hit, the disaffection of the youth and so on.

    at what point will the parallels be enough?

    These Studies have led to increased Recognition of the Significance of her Artistry, and even her Propensity toward Scandal.

    you mean kind of how eve ensler who shot warhole now has a podium? or is this what i said it is, glorifying the era just previous to the ascention of a populus leader who would change everything.

    after all, to us she was quite perverse and sick till the 60s and beyond, where suddenly we are all copying her. (kind of like the famous soviet realizm sculpture heralded in rockerfeller center, and no one remembering the original in stalins russia).

    For Example, “Karl Toepfer” places “Berber” in the Context of her Era’s Attitude towards Nudity, as exemplified by the German “Physical culture” Movement (“Nacktkultur”) that elevated the Nude Body to a Symbol of Fitness and Beauty. He contrasts this Idealism with the alienated Style in “Berber’s” Work, that he sees as an Attempt to “aestheticize” her “Sickness,” while also noting the considerable Dance Skills She employed. In “Droste/Berber’s” Portrayals of Addiction, Horror, Narcissism, Ecstasy, and Morbidity, “Toepfer” sees a Challenge to Modernity’s Claim to Authenticity and even a macabre Mysticism.

    sounds like our liberal left (and many of us) talking about piss christ…

    however none of our conversations are about how they lived, how things changed, how that moved them away from the way to choose better. and on and on. most dont know that many of wiemars inventions became american stapels. they dont know that the advertisement of america as apple pie and such started as a nazi poster.

    amoing the cogniscenti, she is known.. amoung the common lumpen prols, she isnt.

    now you know why crappy performance art was held up for us to want. (and replace other things as said in the comenterns orders), it got us to walk the same steps and do so in the same ignorance of such.

    anyone see the nude pictures of obamas mama?
    same old same old…

    Among those Anita Berber claimed as members of her vast sexual harem were Marlene Dietrich, Magnus Hirschfeld (the founder of modern sexology and gay liberation), Klaus Mann, Conrad Veidt, Lawrence Durrell, and the King of Yugoslavia. Berber acted in Fritz Lang’s Dr. Mabuse: The Gambler and starred in the silent epic, Lucifer. Even Leni Riefenstahl credits Berber for inspiring her controversial career. After sated Berliners finally tired of Anita Berber’s libidinous antics, she became a “carrion soul that even the hyenas ignored,” dying in 1928 at the age of 29.

    so she is VERY relevent today..

    after all, do a search on
    “magnus hirschfeld gesellschaft”
    “magnus hirschfeld glsen”

    and you will find out Czar is familiar with him!!!
    Einstein of Sex

    Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, a gay German Jew living in 19th-century Berlin, founded the first gay political group and the first medical practice for gays, the renowned Institute on Sexual Science, which thrived until Nazi oppression. Directed by Rosa von Praunheim, this film tells Hirschfeld’s story in a lush historical drama which is both a celebration of gay history and an incisive piece of queer filmmaking. (German with English Subtitles)

    those who dont knwo history are doomed to repeat it. because the nigerian con works on those who dont know it! so we forget, and we are conned again.

    so much for the who…

    We Don’t Get Fooled Again

    We’ll be fighting in the streets
    With our children at our feet
    And the morals that they worship will be gone
    And the men who spurred us on
    Sit in judgement of all wrong
    They decide and the shotgun sings the song

    I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
    Take a bow for the new revolution
    Smile and grin at the change all around
    Pick up my guitar and play
    Just like yesterday
    Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
    We don’t get fooled again

    The change, it had to come
    We knew it all along
    We were liberated from the fold, that’s all
    And the world looks just the same
    And history ain’t changed
    ‘Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war

    I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
    Take a bow for the new revolution
    Smile and grin at the change all around
    Pick up my guitar and play
    Just like yesterday
    Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
    We don’t get fooled again!

    I’ll move myself and my family aside
    If we happen to be left half alive
    I’ll get all my papers and smile at the sky
    Though I know that the hypnotized never lie.

    There’s nothing in the streets
    Looks any different to me
    And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
    And the parting on the left
    Are now parting on the right
    And the beards have all grown longer overnight

    I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
    Take a bow for the new revolution
    Smile and grin at the change all around
    Pick up my guitar and play
    Just like yesterday
    Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
    We don’t get fooled again!

    Meet the new boss Same as the old boss


  8. Mark Says:

    “September 28th, 2009
    I was going to write about the Polanski arrest…”

    First you didn’t. Now you did. Seems a little weak in the ole’ spinal column.

    Hey, I prefer Roman Polanski tossed in the pokey for his crime and his decades on the run. That’s a no-brainer.

    I just favor someone who knows what the hell they’re doing and sticks to it. In my upstate New York opinion, Doc, that ain’t you.

    Next time, ditch the woman’s prerogative and don’t change your mind. Make you seem more credible, it will.

  9. huxley Says:

    (8) The perp wasn’t conservative, Republican, or Christian.

    I can’t imagine Whoopi Goldberg resorting to a distinction like “rape-rape” in those cases.

  10. Mitch Says:

    This may be an example of the cultural left’s tribal instincts. If one of their tribe commits a crime, no matter how vile, they will defend him. This has nothing to do with any moral sense, just group cohesion. There was no similar nonsense (nor should there have been) from Applebaum when Catholic priests were jailed for similar crimes committed around the same time. It’s just the inverse of the Red Queen’s jurisprudence: exoneration comes first, then the trial.

  11. Artfldgr Says:

    I told him that most people look at the criminals when trying to figure out how it was possible, that such evil could happen in a cultured nation like Germany. They should look, however, at the real culprits, the bystanders like me, who allowed evil to dominate.

    quoting me above, quoting aim, quoting hilmar…

    to show the stuff in action.

    I gave you reasons: Obama is not Stalin or Hitler; the US is not 1930s Germany or WWI Czarist Russia; the American people are nowhere near as radical or desperate as those Germans or Russians.

    These differences seem so large and obvious I didn’t think they needed any more explanation.

    Perhaps further down the line, if Obama reveals himself as a leader of Hitler’s or Stalin’s inhuman ruthlessness and masterful cunning, absolutely adored by a substantial portion of the population.

    But so far, he looks more like a foppish radical ex-stoner wannabe who has ridden his good looks and shrewdness for manipulating white guilt and Democrat machine politics to the White House, voted in by people who thought he was someone else, but is now over his head and fumbling.

    when you see the one who served and was forced to kill people and whose father was killed.. say something…

    and you hear what i am saying, since my grandfatehr and cousins and others were ground up and killed.

    then you read huxley above…

    and then you read my post about berber, and how she parallels our entertainment. how she is celebrated. how one of hers is tied to our Czar.. (which is really a commisar).

    are the american people nowhere near as radical?

    or is it that we are so used to perversion, that we cant see how radical we are?

    that our radical perverse ways have been described as progress, so we cant see them unless we want to admit our progress was towards what?

    we have it all… all the same…

    except huxley confuses AFTER hitler, with my saying we are JUST BEFORE that.

    and a key reason why huxley believes this, is that he was like that ( ), and he came around. however, anyone who reads him knows that he is smart, just cause he came around, dont mean everyone will. and if they all do, they will not act responsibly… but will do what is needed to lock us down.

    again… he sees tiny battles, but he and others cant rise above to add up all the battles and see a flow to it. but then again, they have no reference, no history..

    they cant even remember what they said themselves 6 months ago (or longer)!

  12. huxley Says:

    Artfldgr: Arguing with you would be like arguing with tapioca. So I don’t.

    Leave me out of your posts and I will do likewise.

  13. Mark Says:

    Roman Polanski and Hitler?


    Take a chill pill. See one of the blogger’s associates for assistance.

    How in the name of anything logical does Roman Polanski’s perversion of 30 years ago equate to Hitler’s mass murder of 65-70 years ago?

    I’ve got no use for Polanski. Hitler’s barely worth discussing in the Department of Useless Topics and/or People. His spot’s a given.

    But this moral relativism argument is the slipperiest of slippery slopes and one thinks the Doc’s about to slice her pretty little logical wrists trying to Occam’s Razor this one off.

  14. Artfldgr Says:

    Fair… since you started declaring things and such. shall i qiuote it.

    i was TRYING to follwo what neo told you and I. but as i told her i will not sit aronud and be falsely commented on, and then not respond.

    1. neo-neocon Says:
    July 17th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
    Artfldg: I know you have a history with huxley. But, that said, it is certainly possible that the sentence was not meant to be demeaning, but rather was meant to actually convey thanks to you for increasing the readability of your post. And although of course I could be incorrect, that was the way I read it.
    And I will repeat to you and to huxley and to others who have been infighting back-and-forth here in a personal manner lately, I request that if you feel the need to make it so personal, please take it elsewhere, such as to email correspondence.

  15. Mark Says:

    huxley Says:
    September 29th, 2009 at 4:43 pm

    Artfldgr: Arguing with you would be like arguing with tapioca. So I don’t.

    Leave me out of your posts and I will do likewise.



    You’re a smarter blogger than I am, Gunga Din.

    I tip the Doc’s bowler hat to you.

  16. Memphis Steve Says:

    We tell our children, “if anyone touches your private parts, report it to someone in authority.”

    Then we tell our little girls “hurt the boys there, where it counts the most.”

    Then we tell the little boys, “if she hurts you down there, it is your fault. You must have done something to deserve it.”

    Then we issue Tasers to our police, devices specifically and intentionally designed to spear the genitals of men and fry them with 50,000 volts of sexual torture and burning flesh. We do this to men and boys for crimes ranging from saying “no” to a police officer to not wearing a seatbelt. We video the scene as the officers electrocute men’s testicles over and over again while the man flips and flops on the ground, crying and trying to scream. We laugh. We make fun of his pain in endless movies and TV shows.

    Then we announce to the world that we don’t torture. And we don’t tolerate the sexualization of children.

    Or, at least not the female children. You can do whatever you like with the male children. We’re just going to castrate them anyway.

    This is where were are today in America. We are the new Rome, leaderless, corrupt, lazy, and immoral. You can’t touch our females, but you can do anything you please to our males.

  17. Artfldgr Says:

    How in the name of anything logical does Roman Polanski’s perversion of 30 years ago equate to Hitler’s mass murder of 65-70 years ago?

    who said they equated? reading comprehension please.

    i am trying to show how the stage was set BEFORE the rise of the despot took advantage.

    eeryone is so geared up againt conversing about HOW despots get tehre, that they like you, decide to write it off and completely ignore it.

    the real reason is that you may know hitler from the after and from the cartoons and such. but you dont know the conditions that led up to him from a peoples point. you may know from a historical point as to who did what when.

    polanski is a product of the era just after hitler. care to look when he was born and where he is from?

    Roman Raymond Polanski (pl. Roman Rajmund Polański; born August 18, 1933)

    The Polański family moved back to the Polish city of Krakow in 1936,[14] and were living there in 1939, when World War II began. Poland was invaded and occupied by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Nazi racial and religious purity laws made the Polańskis targets of German Nazi persecution and forced them into the Kraków Ghetto, along with thousands of other Polish Jews.

    His father survived the Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp in Austria, but his mother perished in the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Polanski himself escaped the Kraków Ghetto in 1943, and survived the war with the help of Polish Roman Catholic families.[14] After the war he was reunited with his father[14] and moved back to Krakow.

    his art was from his childhood, from the heady days of the weimar republic! he brought to his films the same decadence of his early years and perceptions of women like Berber


    no one takes any time to look up anything.

    During the Soviet-imposed communism in Poland, Roman Polanski attended the Polish film school in Łódź, and graduated in 1959.[22

    so his style was dictated by the soviets. a soviet realizm.. AND NOW YOU KNOW WHY THEY LOVE HIM… like all their love for that place…

    still think they have nothing to do with each other?

    his idea of morals were changed by living through nazi and soviet games, then being a soviet artist.

    Polanski’s first feature-length film, Knife in the Water, was also the first significant Polish film after WWII that did not have a war theme. Made from a script by Jerzy Skolimowski, Jakub Goldberg and Polanski himself, Knife in the Water is an intense, moody, claustrophobic three-hander about a wealthy, unhappily married couple who decide to take a mysterious hitchhiker with them on a weekend boating excursion. A dark and unsettling work, Polanski’s debut feature subtly evinces a profound pessimism about human relationships with regard to the psychological dynamics and moral consequences of status envy and sexual jealousy.

    Although not well-received by the Polish communist cultural authorities because of its lack of a socially redeeming message, Knife in the Water was nevertheless a major commercial success in the West and gave Polanski an international reputation. The film also earned its director his first Academy Award nomination (Best Foreign Language Film, 1963).

    so again.. he became famous from his soviet pictures and came west to a waiting set of leftists and liberals..

    and so followed the same thing as the elite in germany and other places who took up socialism.

    Most people dont know these early works. they dont know this stuff i talk about.

    and when i talk about it. those that dont know like you, decide to attack me to remove their ignorance, rather than go look up somethign and remove it.

    her is how it goes.

    you read somethign that makes no sense to you

    you dont try to find the link. you instead think you know that the link is absurd, and so, you come back and say:
    How in the name of anything logical does Roman Polanski’s perversion of 30 years ago equate to Hitler’s mass murder of 65-70 years ago?

    because Roman polanski lived through that perverse time before he came to america. his reality and time as a young man was nazi ideology, and soviet ideology and stalinsm.

    is that enough of a link?

  18. neo-neocon Says:

    Mark: you might want to note that this post is not about the Polanski arrest. It is about the reaction of many pundits to it, and it is an attempt to explain that reaction.

    But I suppose you’d rather hurl insults.

  19. Richard Aubrey Says:

    I understand a number of Europeans and some Americans of the self-anointed morally superior category are annoyed at our refusal to let a child rapist go on account of time served on the Riviera or something.
    Somebody UK-ish said the American soul is hard, stoic, isolate, and a killer. It has never yet melted. He thought that was a bug.

  20. Artfldgr Says:

    now they have a petition… woody allen signed..

  21. Artfldgr Says:

    and now the left is going to find out who is loyal and who is not. loyal follows party line no matter what (like hillary).

    HuffPo Goes All In to Defend Polanski, Readers Revolt

  22. Artfldgr Says:

    sad thing is that it will be as von campe said. no one will do anything. and by that, the masses, they will forget who stood up for the drugged rape and sodomy of a 13 year old girl, who signed the petition, and choose not to see those peoples art anymore.

    they have a large chance to clean out things by just refusing to buy or watch movies by people who think that way.

    same with the wingnuts that party with despots, or use family planning to be an example of bizarre family manufacture.

    america could easily clean up by putting their hard earned cash in other places. looking to other sources to please them rather than keep paying to watch the next disappointing thing.

    the stuff over at huff po though shows that even among liberals, most are posers of posers and when something real hits home, maybe they arent liberal. maybe they arent secular.

    maybe they are who they are and not who the left tells them to be?

  23. neo-neocon Says:

    Artfldgr: thanks for the links. I’ve added an addendum about them to the post.

    Woody Allen—why, of course. At least he didn’t rape anyone, nor was the girl (who is still his wife) underage. Just young, and the daughter of his lover. Polanski makes Allen seem like a pillar of the community.

  24. JohnC Says:

    Hey Mark – I know you have a cooool way of expressing yourself. We can see that. I know also that Neo does not like infighting on her blog. But I’ll engage you one time and one time only, if she will allow it. You see I have a cool way of expressing myself too .. .. like . . ..’hey Mark you are a dim-wit’.

  25. waltj Says:

    “…Somebody UK-ish said the American soul is hard, stoic, isolate(d), and a killer. It has never yet melted…”

    I like it.

    As far as Polanski goes, a 40-something (at the time) guy should be able to resist the advances of a jailbait “temptress”, no matter how much she was coming onto him. Unless he didn’t want to. And that’s the bottom line. He didn’t want to. Guilty.

  26. Cappy Says:

    Enough jibber-jabber. Give Dr. Helen a .45, a couple of magazines, and have her finish the job.

  27. Occam's Beard Says:

    the American soul is hard, stoic, isolate(d), and a killer. It has never yet melted…”

    That was true of the British soul too, back when it was great. It’s true of all great nations, while they’re still great. When they lose that quality, they lose greatness.

  28. Gray Says:

    Then we issue Tasers to our police, devices specifically and intentionally designed to spear the genitals of men and fry them with 50,000 volts of sexual torture and burning flesh.


    I was unaware the Taser was “specifically and intentionally designed” to shock the c*ck.

    I thot it had, like, other purposes or somthing….

    BTW, I’m naming my next band:

    “50,000 Volts of Sexual Torture (and Burning Flesh)”

  29. Rick Says:

    Not siding with Polanski, mind you, but anyone interested in a contrarian view should watch the HBO film “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired,” for a little more detail on the crime and punishment phases of this drama. According to that movie, Polanski was cooperating with the law and willing to serve time, but a certain nefarious judge was planning on using the case for self-aggrandizement and Polanski decided he was better off as a fugitive than as a pawn.

  30. Gray Says:

    If Nietzche had a blog, it would read just like Steve Memphis’.

  31. Vieux Charles Says:

    I comment on the Huffington Post regularly using the same ‘Vieux Charles’ pseudonym that I use here.

    Normally, I go there to score a few easy kills. Their commenters and bloggers are mindless liberals, who value histrionics over homework and are devoid of even basic logic or reason.

    That said, they surpised me on their reaction to Polanski and I’m not sure what to make of it. They are genuinely disgusted by his sense of priviledge, his lack of decency and his disregard for the law.

    Of course they are! How can anyone defend this?

    But, these are liberals, my liberals. After decades of listening to them defend the indefensible; Bill Maher’s racist rants, Al Gore’s ostentatious carbon fests, Bill Clinton’s sexual deviancy, Chris Dodd’s VIP mortages and Tom Daschle’s tax evasion (to name but a very, very few) I thought I knew them?

    What’s going on?

    Is a chasm finally developing between the moneyed liberal elite and their starry-eyed minions?

  32. Assistant Village Idiot Says:

    Vieux – chip, chip, chip…

    Keep up the good work. Couldn’t abide it myself.

    Rick, point taken. Polanski took a calculated risk. He won for a while. Now the rent is due. It’s not a moral or honorable stance, but perhaps a practical one.

    As to the judge’s nefarious desires: presumably Polanski could have hired lawyers and PR firm to counteract that. It doesn’t hold up.

  33. Vieux Charles Says:

    Rick Says: and Polanski decided he was better off as a fugitive than as a pawn

    He drugged and raped a thirteen year old kid, got a plea bargain down to unlawful sexual intercouse and now Polanski’s the victim???

    Sorry dude, not buying it.

  34. Richard Aubrey Says:

    D. H. Lawrence.
    Hard, cold, isolate, stoic, a killer. Never yet melted.
    Some folks should keep that in mind. The US’ response to 9-11 was considerably different than the Spanish response to their train bombing.

  35. Gray Says:

    The US’ response to 9-11 was considerably different than the Spanish response to their train bombing.

    Yeah, they immediately elected Zapatero, a terrorist appologist.

    We dicked around for a few years and then elected Obama, a terrorist appologist.

  36. I R A Darth Aggie Says:

    Next time, ditch the woman’s prerogative and don’t change your mind. Make you seem more credible, it will.

    Oh, so you’ve never changed your mind, eh? don’t be a slave to foolish consistency.

    Besides, this isn’t a note on Polanski or his crimes. It’s a note on the moral blindness of the chattering class, and just another indication of how far away they are from “flyover” country. Explains their poor box office tallies over the last several years.

  37. Gray Says:

    According to that movie, Polanski was cooperating with the law and willing to serve time, but a certain nefarious judge was planning on using the case for self-aggrandizement and Polanski decided he was better off as a fugitive than as a pawn.

    To continue the chess analogies, he’d be better off still if he had flogged the bishop instead of porking a kid.

    Yeah, Rick, it’s true: it’s hard to find a judge sympathetic to banging kids, but best of luck to you….

  38. Gray Says:

    Oh, Van der Leun skewers an LA Times writer on this issue (and not in the sweet Roman Polansky way).

  39. Gray Says:

    Polanski quote:

    “If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”


  40. Memphis Steve Says:

    Sorry, my comment was about as unrelated to the post as it could be. I haven’t slept in 3 days and I’m not on top of my game at the moment.

  41. Richard Aubrey Says:

    I have to admit you have depressed me. Yeah, we did.
    The fiddy-two-ers have set us on a course for trouble.
    But the explosions that were going on for some years might still have a cautionary effect. For a while.

  42. southernjames Says:

    Neo’s (2), or a version of it, is a big cause, I think for the mentality at play here. The average left wing commoner is I think, deep down, truly okay with differing sets of rules for different “classes” of people – as opposed to the AMERICAN ideal that we are all, at least theoretically, supposed to be equal under the law.

    That might explain why your average Lib apparently has no problem with, e.g., Clinton being a womanizer but still a “feminist” or with Al Gore jetting around the world spewing carbon and living in a huge mansion and owning a 100 foot boat – while still preaching that the “end is near” due to our (the rest of us) awful polluting habits…..etc.

    It’s different for HIM. He is “important” and “special” you see. Some are more equal than others, and for example if we are Cubans, and if Dear Leader Castro owns ten castle-sized mansions while the rest of us live in hovels, well – he needs and deserves it! And Michelle O looks simply LOVELY in those $500 sneakers too, by the way. And Lady Di perishes while riding in a car with her current playboy Lover du jour? I’ll weep for days, yes indeedy I will! Et Cetera.

    This especially hit me over the head after Ted Kennedy died. In the comments section to some MSM article on him shortly after his death, I was stunned at what can only be described as a full fledged endorsement for the concept of “noblesse oblige” among the lib commenters, excusing and writing off the whole Mary Jo part of his past.

    And yet they would deny their belief in this if confronted with it – completely lacking self-awareness.

    These are people whose European ancestors must have been the types who, upon hearing that the King’s carriage would be passing through the village, would line the sides of the roads in breathless anticipation, hours in advance, and then toss rose petals at His Royal and Most Majestic Highness, immediately prior to dropping to their knees and bowing their heads in grateful supplication, for the honor of his most magnificent majesty’s horses sh–tting on the road as he trotted past….

  43. Giles Says:


    I hold by the rule that in politics one should never assume that an action is caused by malice unless power is not an ultimate goal. Granted, the two often come hand in hand, with Leftists taking pleasure from viciously targeting Conservative viewpoints, but power is usually the desired goal.

    This Polanski incident is that sort of case. The Left doesn’t believe that child rape is acceptable – at least, I don’t think that anyone could stretch doublethink to that degree – but if it’s committed by a Leftist, then obviously it was justifiable. They defend one of their own, because if child rape is the greatest of all evils and Polanski is guilty of it then it must not be all that evil. That’s where power comes into play; the Left doesn’t want to lose another producer of media in these days when public opinion is so crucial.

    – G

  44. Lynne Says:

    What I am about to say will not be popular.
    I agree that Polanski must take his punishment, and I would prefer hard time.
    But to paint this strictly as a leftist problem is dishonest. The right also has its mascots and in the past has vociferously defended them against nearly identical charges.
    Take as an example the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. For years the right has daintily averted its eyes from evidence of child rape, domestic violence and child labor on the part of the FLDS. Despite repeated Congressional testimony, written accounts and repeated investigative reporting, you would never know from most right-leaning writers and blogs that the group is anything other than pastoral, old-fashioned, all-American “good Christian folk” enduring religious persecution. (There are also a number of smaller, non-FLDS groups allegedly using the same abusive practices, and they too are ignored.)
    Some righty bloggers have even argued that they can’t be investigated or punished because we don’t punish young unwed mothers in the inner cities or put their ‘baby daddies’ in jail.
    Well, how do you apply that logic to the Polanski case?
    I thoroughly agree the Polanski deserves to go to jail.
    But if we are really serious about stopping such abuse, the right needs to stop being useful idiots for groups like the FLDS.

  45. southernjames Says:

    Not buying what you’re selling Lynne.

    The “well, what about the Mormans,” is kind of like responding to Acorn being revealed as an intensely corrupt criminal enterprise with the refrain – “Well what about Blackwater’s abuses in Iraq and THEY get more money than Acorn does. So there!”.

    There is no end to the creative uses of this dodge.

    The Tianammen Square slaughters by the ChiComs? “Well, what right do WE have to cast stones – what about our own genocide of native Americans!!”

    And so on.

    “My oranges may be rotten but YOUR apples have worms.” So before we talk about my oranges, YOU admit to your wormy apples – (which aren’t really comparable because it is apples vs. oranges, but it at least changes the subject from my bad oranges).

    Does that about sum up your argument in a nutshell, Lynne?

    Are you condeming the entire Morman church or just the fundamentalist fringe groups which NOBODY supports. If it is the entire Morman church you decry, then I suppose you must be (if you are a political conservative) one of those shameful Huckabee-ites, who helped torpedo Romney’s campaign with nasty innuendo.

    If you’re a lefty, then the equivalency (“Obama is doing X? Well Bush was worse”) is about as good as you can do I suppose. It is how the government schools teach kid to think. Islamic terrorists, killing in the name of Allah? Let’s all study the Inquisition in order to have balance here, kids. Stalin’s gulags? Don’t get too smug or anything and think we’re any better – 35% of our entire US History course this year will be studying oppression of peoples of color in AMERICA, and the civil rights movement.

    Back to the topic at hand, it is the Leftist hero worhip of an “elite” individual, and leftist moral equivalency, at play here, in the call for Polanski clemency. Correct? Yes or no. Answer THAT question and stay on topic.

  46. southernjames Says:

    “The Left doesn’t want to lose another producer of media in these days when public opinion is so crucial.”


    When is the last time this guy even made a movie?

  47. Lynne Says:

    I said at least twice in that post that Polanski needs to go to jail.
    I’m not ‘selling’ anything. I’m saying what I have seen. I did extensive research on this subject last year, including interviews I conducted myself.
    Can you say the same?
    My, you seem a bit defensive.
    Defensive enough to skim my post and then cough up an argument as shopworn and predigested as you claim mine to be.
    Leftist hero worship? Sure.
    Prosecute? Yes. How many times do I have to say it?
    Now answer my question: does child rape in a religious cult merit the same attention as child rape in a celebrity?
    Wipe the foam from your chin and answer yes or no.

    Or don’t bother. I can live without another content-free rant.

  48. waltj Says:

    “…It’s different for HIM. He is “important” and “special” you see. Some are more equal than others…”

    This is exactly the logic of both rulers and ruled in the third-world cesspools I’ve lived in. It’s why they’re third-world cesspools: the “elite”, i.e., those with money and/or ties to the ruling politicians (usually both) can do whatever they want. The generally-impoverished common people usually just tug their forelocks, bow down, and think, “he’s an important man, he can do as he pleases, who am I to tell him no?” I think most leftists secretly, or not so secretly, would welcome the strict class separations prevalent in so many parts of the world…as long as they’re on the “elite” side, of course.

    Regarding the Fundamentalist LDS, I’m one conservative who has no problem whatsoever with looking closely at this “sect” (more like a cult), locking up the polygamists and kiddie-diddlers, shutting down their compounds, and confiscating their assets (to be distributed to the victims). We need more FLDS like we need more Salafi mosques. In fact, I don’t see a helluva lot of difference between the two.

  49. southernjames Says:

    “Wipe the foam from your chin and answer yes or no.”

    Seems like you’re the one foaming at the mouth here. Sorry you’ve had such a bad experience with some Mormans. I really am. I hope you can get some counseling to rebuild your life.

    As for me, the few Morman families I’ve known in my life who were friends and neighbors in the town in Indiana I grew up in, seemed like very nice people. But maybe some really creepy sh–t went on behind closed doors – I don’t know. If so, they sure fooled me. Otherwise, I haven’t paid them much attention in my quest to be an upstanding gun-totin wingnut. These days I mostly hang out with fellow Catholics and a few Jewish colleagues/friends.

    You know, the last time I checked, the topic here was a discussion over the calls for clemency for Polanski and why it is occuring.

    Do I think Islamic “honor” killings of daughters who embarass the head of the family, occuring in the USA and Western Europe now, deserve as much “attention” as a celebrity child rape? Why yes. Yes I do. We should discuss that. We really should.

    Does this have anything to do with the topic at hand? Why no, no it doesn’t. Funny how that works, isn’t it.

    Do I think some nut named Brigham Joseph Smith VII, who lives with 8 wives in some compound down near Fartville Nevada, or Hog Holler Utah, along with half a dozen other guys who all have several wives, some of whom are diddling young girls – Polanski-style – should be prosecuted? Maybe even shot? Why yes, yes I do. A bullet to the head to a few of those guys will, I expect, serve as a wonderful deterrent to the rest of them.

    Does this have anything to do with the topic at hand? Why no, no it doesn’t. Funny how that works!!!

    But go ahead and lecture us some more, from on high, about topics unrelated to Roman Polanski and the popular cultural movement known as “FreeTheOldRapist.”

  50. Barry Says:

  51. Richard Aubrey Says:

    There was some extended commentary on the FLDS Texas compound and the Texas CPS response on Volokh Conspiracy.
    Turns out that most of the allegations lacked supporting evidence.
    The triggering event was a bogus call from a woman in another state, which the cops knew.
    While the Volokhers went one way or another, the consensus of a good many of them was that this was another example of CPS overreach.
    Now, I know there will be foaming outrage about apologizing for kiddy rape–the usual tactic one would find on feminist boards is not restricted to feminist boards–but the facts are that there was little to no evidence it actually happened.
    Fortunately, unlike that other Texas event staged “for the chilrun”, no children were killed. Nursing kids separated from their mothers, yes, but you actually get to do bad stuff to folks the rest of society has labled a cult.
    Meanwhile–see Islamberg and other child-abusing facilities–some cults are more equal than others. Usually has to do with their propensity to shoot back.

  52. Baklava Says:

    Lynne negligently wrote, “For years the right has daintily averted its eyes from evidence of child rape, domestic violence and child labor on the part of the FLDS

    Please let us know which person who was ‘guilty’ in LDS was ‘excused’ by the right and who that person was on the right and what their quote was.

    We would be glad to hammer that person.

    You ma’am are negligent. You won’t be able to find quotes like you can find today of leftist after leftist offering excuses for this criminal.

    Case closed.

  53. Baklava Says:

    Conservatives are tough on crime.

    Mom’s and daughters become disgusted with liberal Democrats at their excuses for criminals.

    Conservatives are interested in national security

    Mom’s and daughters become disgusted with liberal Democrats weak national security policies.

    Conservatives are interested in equal opportunity.

    Mom’s and daughters become disgusted when the left trashes the likes of Condaleeza and Sarah Palin.

  54. Gus Says:

    I call bullshit. There have been a couple of posts on HuffPo defending him. Anne Applebaum has come out in his favor. Everything else I’ve read has celebrated the fact that he’s in custody, including every liberal blog I read and liberal WaPo columnist Gene Robinson.

  55. Artfldgr Says:

    One more shot of last weekend’s Folsom Street Fair in San Fransicko — work safe, yet still more disturbing than the others:

    Small children have been seen at events like this in the past, sometimes wearing S&M fetish accessories:

    Once homosexuality has been mainstreamed, sexualizing children could be the next frontier in the culture war.

  56. southernjames Says:

    The LA Times intially referred to him as an “accused” child rapist. Which is false.

    Okay, so lefty bloggers are condemning him. Good for them.

    But the support for Polanski came out en masse from the Hollywood Glitterati – producers, actors, etc., not to mention celebs like Whoopi “its not rape-rape” Goldberg. All who are popular Leftys and not Rightys. Hollywood “speaks” for the Left a whole hell of a lot these days – whether it be to protest Bush’s wars, or to support healing Mother Gaia. Perfectly acceptable to the Left for Hollywood celebs to be a mouthpiece. Except now. Oh but now, “they don’t represent liberal views.”

  57. Ymarsakar Says:

    But to paint this strictly as a leftist problem is dishonest.

    No, it is not dishonest. IT is simply looking at the power balance as it stands now. It isn’t looking at your pet theory, yes, and that’s too bad, but that is just how it is.

    When Leftists want to take on what they call right wing extremists, they either go in with guns blazing and kill everybody involved (WACO) or they send in the government goons (the pigs you like to use to terrorize your priority target group) to kidnap children (Elian).

    So pardon us for not particularly trusting in the honesty of people who want to help the Left push on these issues. We don’t think you’ll let them have a trial. We think you’ll advocate for their slaughter or deportation from the protections of the US Constitution, in order to conveniently get rid of some people you don’t want around.

    This is not the rule of law. But the Left never liked the rule of law anyways. If you think you can work with the Left to further the rule of law, in any shape whatsoever, then it’s on your head, not ours.

    I’m not ’selling’ anything.

    Oh come on, we’ve seen Leftist indoctrination and partisan groups at work. You have your agenda and your priorities. Trying to hide it under some fake ‘objective’ criteria is like the New York Times Bill Keller telling us he is straight down the middle, along with Dan Rather saying he is just reporting the facts on BUsh’s NG record.

    I’m saying what I have seen.

    Obviously you’ve seen a bunch of non-existent people, because I didn’t hear you name one person. Look at Hannah Giles and O’Keefe’s video. Notice how many names they have? Notice how many names you have? What have you really seen? LSD hallucinations, perhaps.

    I did extensive research on this subject last year, including interviews I conducted myself.

    Oh, so you have said what you have seen, and conveniently we don’t have access to these interviews that you have said you have, the names of the people involved, or their connections, biases, or potential payoffs. This is what you, of the LDS priority group, thinks is eye witness testimony?

    Everything else I’ve read has celebrated the fact that he’s in custody, including every liberal blog I read and liberal WaPo columnist Gene Robinson.

    Follow the money. THe reason why your side keeps supporting child prostitution rings like ACORN is that you don’t want to follow the money.

  58. Paul_D Says:

    When Leftists want to take on what they call right wing extremists, they either go in with guns blazing and kill everybody involved (WACO) or they send in the government goons (the pigs you like to use to terrorize your priority target group) to kidnap children (Elian).

    Ah, there’s a pattern emerging. Any day now there will be a predator drone airstrike on Operation Rescue or the headquarters of the Aryan Brotherhood. Thanks for the tip.

  59. Maggie's Farm Says:

    Regular Weds. links, late edition…

    Is the O "playing at being President?" Gratuitously cruel but cute-as-heck photo of the O is h/t NE Repub.
    Sarkozy: The O incredibly naive and egotistical.
    The O wants the US to surrender sovereignty – but to whom?
    These are supp…

  60. Mrs Whatsit Says:

    Gus, you’re being pretty selective in what you read. You must have been careful not to read Whoopi Goldberg’s comment that what Polanski did is fine because it was not “rape-rape”, whatever that means. Or Woody Allen’s remarks, or the petition spearheaded by Bernard Henri-Levy and signed by such luminaries as Salman Rushdie and Milan Kundera complaining that poor little Polanski is “sleeping in jail” after being apprehended “like a common terrorist.”

    I think you’re calling bullshit on the wrong folks.

  61. Artfldgr Says:

    Get whoopies attention!!

    Roman Polanski: What Did He Do?
    13-Year-Old’s Testimony Tells Story Behind Polanski’s Guilty Plea to Unlawful Sexual Intercourse

    ABCNews obtained transcripts of Geimer’s 1977 grand jury testimony, which resulted in six charges against Polanski. They include shocking details of 13-year-old Geimer testifying that the 43-year-old Polanski plied her with champagne and part of a Quaalude before performing oral, vaginal and anal intercourse on her, despite her demands to “keep away.”


    According to Geimer’s testimony, Polanski first met Geimer at her home on Feb. 13, 1977. Geimer said the director asked her mother if he could photograph her for French Vogue. She said her mother agreed to a private photo shoot, which Geimer told ABC’s “Good Morning America” in 2003 that she believed would help further her acting career.

    basically the sleazebag pulled the i am going to make you a star bs…

    anyone want to list out the director/songwriter (?) recently arrested for such games?

    Polanski took pictures of Geimer at someone else’s residence before they drove to Jack Nicholson’s home. There, events took a darker turn, as Geimer said Polanski loaded her with champagne, then asked her to pose topless again.

    “We did photos with me drinking champagne,” Geimer later told “GMA.” “He was friendly and then right toward the end it got a little scary, and I realized, you know, he had some other intentions, and then I knew I was not where I should be. I just didn’t quite know how to get myself out of there.”

    and so she didnt get out of there…
    13 years old.. how could she?

    if you read the rest you dont get ANY idea of ANY mitgation. all you get is a detailed report of how a person used their status to get a girl alone away from family, and then over a few times groome her, trap her, ignore her please, and with the care of a sociopathic sexual sadist, get his jollies. ‘

    she is saying no. tried to leave. as she is doing all this, he is just continuing on as if she is consenting.

    Instead, a few minutes later, Geimer said, Polanski began having intercourse with her, while asking her if she was on the pill and when her last period was.

    She testified that he then asked, “Would you like me to go in through your back?” Then, he started performing anal sex on her.

    no matter what she said, he was going to plod on, and then in his side of the facts, pretend it was consentual. he asked, etc.

    what a complete and utter slime…

    Angelical Houston had a chacne to save her
    but she was afraid and didnt yell out.

    [remember he is the great roman polanski, who would believe a 13 year old girl. etc etc etc]

    Today, Hollywood is still rushing to Polanski’s defense. Directors Martin Scorsese, David Lynch and Woody Allen are among dozens in the film industry who have agreed to sign a petition calling for the immediate release of Polanski. In a British newspaper, film producer Harvey Weinstein, who has already signed the petition, called Polanski’s original plea deal a “miscarriage of justice.”

    c;mon people… all we have to do is stop pretending life is a movie, and act on these things. we only have to refuse to go to a woody allen flick, refuse to watch his tapes from blockbuster.

    the point is, do we have the morals to say, yeah we love their work, but we will not starve without their pulp.

    after all, its not like they are really producing great works since most of the people aligning themselves are soviet type artists with messages in their films..

    perhaps if we did this, we might see a nice remake of charly and the chockolate factory rather than marcuse polumorphous perverted versions to demovalize us.

    maybe they will stop propagating the propaganda, like winter soldier.

    but it is as von campe said. i and he may refuse to watch and choose some other thing, but the majority cant let go of any pleasure…

    they are so painfully empty…

  62. Mrs Whatsit Says:

    I don’t know, Art, people might be more able to let go of their viewing pleasures for moral reasons than you suspect. I believe viewership of Woody Allen’s films dropped off sharply after he struck up his relationship with Soon-yi Previn, who was the adopted daughter of his wife. Something similar could happen here.

  63. Artfldgr Says:

    Woody does two movies a year at Kaufman, and he performs in a bar in manhattan playing clarinet.

    what happened with soon yi was complicated. technically legal and only stretched the senses of those who didnt know that with parents permission it would have been fine a year or so earlier in many states.

    woodies movies are hack shlock, mostly boring, and uses the same freinds over and over.

    if people were able to let go, we never would have celebs like brittany spears, and pol dancing dolls for prepubescent girls.×225.jpg

    we would not have movies like the saw series. they go over the line. dont get me wrong, i always loved blood and gore, but there is something else and its too long to explain. would i say they couldnt be made? probably not… which is why i wish people would do a bit of better choosing since taking their choices away is not a fix.

    people went to the gillotine for entertainment. they sold little gillotines and cut up cloths dipped in blood for souvineers. rome had circus maximus.

    no… i dont think they have that ability any more than the periods in which they did leading up to now. we always were willing to be voyeurs of all manner of things.

    weve never been able to answer: “Whats the harm in watching? “, in a cogent way that makes people decide not to watch. especially not with an understanding that their actions are like tiny votes casted, and watching anything they put up is like giving others your vote by abdication.

  64. Richard Aubrey Says:

    ever hear of “frisson”.
    I believe it’s French for “cheap thrills, experienced second-hand”.
    Something like that.
    Imagine the frisson watching Polanski’s work now.

  65. Artfldgr Says:

    ever hear music that sends chills up your spine and tingles?

    thats frisson… 🙂

  66. Home Remedy Colon Cleanse Says:

    I keep hearing about {home|house|household} {remedies|treatments|solutions|cures}….

    […] I’ve been seeking the finest sites to talk about […]…

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.

Monthly Archives


Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge