"...somebody named Cliff Schecter, an expert. Never heard of him."-Rush Limbaugh
posted by Cliff Schecter @ 6:13 PM
Just like a bad penny. Just sayin'Mwahahahah! You go, boy!
Cliff as the social butterfly.
CliffYou need to fix the link to your blog at FiredogIt needs a dot between 'schecter' and 'blogspot'.How's the baby?
delurking....Cliff, I saw your post over at the Lake and thought you might be interested in reading this. He's a blogger from KY, the one the governor indicted for tax evasion after he had already paid the taxes. Kind of an interesting back story, that. Anyway he's talking about Geo. Clooney. I was actually thinking of maybe his dad Nick when I ran across this post. http://www.bluegrassreport.org/bluegrass_politics/2006/12/senator_george_.html
Sorry, here's a readable link.Blue Grass Report
barbara,You're everywhere too! That's why we keep running into each other :)...Fernando, my answer is yes you got me, it's a curse...Kitt, thanks for the tip for the link at FDL - the baby is GREAT. Adorable little guy...and hoosierville, thanks so much for the link, I do read the bluegrassreport when I have a chance, great on KY politics.
NAMBLA has an unfair rap in my opinion. They're clear about their goals, however much these goals fly in the face of public opinion. They don't exist any more for all intents and purposes, having been hounded out of existence by repressive anti-sex moralists. They're still a convenient whipping boy, despite their nonexistence. And no less than Allen Ginsberg supported them. Yeah, they're fodder for humor, but let's face it: the age of consent laws are inane. Finally, I - uh - met (shall we say) a 17-year-old NAMBLA member when I was 26, He was smart, kind, as sane as anyone - and the problem is....?Just tryin'a start some trouble...
Ed you are a trouble starter we know that. It's why we love you. You're not going to get me with 17. 13 or 14, we have a problem (let's throw in 15 for good measure).I know they're a convenient target for O'Reilly and exaggerated as an enemy for his purposes.But we must draw the line somewhere. And as a social libertarian, I try and draw it for everything, whether it be abortion rights, owning a hunting rifle, choosing to go fight in war or engaging in sexual relations, where there are consenting ADULTS. Now as I said at the opening, I am open to what the definition is (maybe 17 should be it), but I know 14 ain't it.This will sometimes piss off those some of my friends on the left, but at least I am consistent across the issue spectrum.
I hear ya, Cliff. Really. And I'm against the adult sexual exploitation of children. But I'm more of an abstract theorist than a practical political policy setter, and I can't help but think that there's something suspicious about a country that's obsessed with children's sexuality to the point of keeping a moribund group like NAMBLA alive for the sole purpose of titillating self-appointed moralists like O'Reilly under the guise of outrage.
And there you are entirely correct Ed. O'Reilly has blown them up (no pun intended) for his own vile purposes.The Right 1) needs enemies to exist as it is based on resentment 2) projects many of their own desires onto the rest of us (see Ted Haggard, Newt Gingrich, Don Sherwood, 10K other Republicans and yes, Mr. O'Reilly).
Post a Comment