Ok, so we were watching "The Colbert Report" last night, and he made reference to a novel written by "Scooter" Libby, the ex-vp chief of staff. Well, we were skeptical, and had to look it up and verify it. It is true...
Look here for the ugly and disturbing truth about some of the conservative bigwigs in power today.
So, to give you the short run down, Libby wrote in 1996 an erotic book, in which he talks about these girls who were violated by a bear, among other things. Fairly disturbing, no? Well, he isn't the only one writing these things. In the early 80's, the VP's wife wrote an erotic novel about, among other things, lesbians. To put the icing on the cake, Bill O'Reilly, who has seemed to be a sometimes big talker for the conservatives, also wrote an erotic novel...
Why have we not heard of these things?? The election would have been more interesting if the talking heads would have given excepts from the books. Though really, the excepts would all be R rated and unsuitable for listeners.
My theory as to why we never heard about this is because the republicans were clearly in power, and they had a tight hold on what information was and was not gonna be released by news organizations. And now that they are weakening, the news organizations are as cowed as before, and are showing us the unseen side of the people in power.
Your moment of Zen:
Who am I kidding? This whole post is a zen moment!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Just to clarify, O'Reilly's book was a novel of murder and television, as well as rough sex.
Hrm well yes... this all goes back to the media trying to please people. When Bush and his Republican/Conservative cronies were doing well in the polls it was mostly praises accross the board. When Bush is down, the polls reaching record lows, we kick him while he is down.
If we just gave the news like it is all the time with out all this bias crap, then maybe we would not be in this bind. If the news stopped trying to guess what we wanted to hear and just wrote about what they found when they found it, it might not be so bad.
But we have to sensationalize everything, because its not news if it doesn't play like a movie.
P.S. This doesn't make me love conservative republicans any more (not that I think I ever could)... but now it just makes them hypocritical and me more spiteful.
Are you all faulting the conservatives for being....unconservative? (Even if it is only in literary sexual expression.)
Of course, I haven't read any of these books, etc--and granted there are some sexual practices (bears? what?) that I certainly reject--but it's kinda refereshing to see a disregard for sexual puritanism in the fantasies committed to writing by these 'conservative' bigwigs.
Keep in mind that though it is unnerving to think of these particular people as the authors of pornographic/erotic novels (ewww), this is just writing, people. Not fellatio in the Oval Office. Now, that investigative report makes for some hott (oh yes, double 't' hott!!!) reading.
HAHAHA
Oh, and yes, yes, news and bias. Plenty of that to comment on , but whatever..you've already covered that.
I guess in a way I am faulting conservatives for being unconservative. I think what bothers be about it, is that they preach against homosexuality (and I would hope bestiality) and for censorship (of material such as this) and yet they are part of the 'problem'.
I am okay with writing adult material no mater who writes it, but don't speak out against it and then go behind peoples backs and write it. Clinton never told people not to have extra marital affairs ::shrug::
If they practive what they preach, then sure I am all for it... well except that bear thing...
My problem with it all is the hypocracy.
I would reserve that judgment for after learning about legislation supported, etc. Just because they align with the conservative party doesn't necessarily mean that they support all of its policies. Did they speak out about such things? Denounce erotic literature?
Personally, I haven't any idea of their personal stances.
And homosexuality--the wife writing about lesbians is "just a wife" isn't she? Not a political figure....So the hypocrisy not so much of an issue there (for me anyway)
I'm just trying to push another view here--generate some discussion for you. I don't have any facts on this issue.
I had been under the impression that Libby was fairly anti gay rights and anti abotion, maybe I just assumed because he is conservative (and so many of them are) or maybe I had at one time herd something. I however did 5 minutes of internet research and couldn't find hard evidance supporting this.
So I will amend my statement to say that IF a conservative doesn't support something like gay rights he should not be writing fantasy novels about something he thinks is 'wrong'. Its one thing to think about what is 'wrong' to you, its another to spread it around. If you preach about anti slavery, you don't write pro slavery propagandag right?
I guess it truely does depend on exactally what his stance is on the issue as to if it is 'all that' hypocritical. So I will amend it Sampson, as I should have earlier... IF those are his views then its very hypocritical.
My concern with hypocracy does not lie necessarily with the writers.. It is surprising, but its just a book. My main problem is that there people were the golden bunch for the religious right. Unless the religious right does not know about this, it seems a little hypocritical to attack various forms of sexual expression through these political figures while at the same time these figures have written about... well, what they write about.
as for just a wife. Sampson, don't let the feminists hear that, they would get violent. Politicians' wives are not "just wives". was eleanor roosevelt just a wife? How's bout jackie kennedy? Or Mrs. (dont know her name) Reagan?
Politicians wives aren't just wives anymore. they are another voice to express the ideas of the politician and his party.
Does a Presidents Wife have to do all those things? We elected a president NOT a first lady. Some first ladies like Barbara Bush and Hillary Clinton used that power of their own free choice to do a lot for their own causes. Others, such as the current Mrs Bush, have done much less. Do they really have to do anything at all? They have no obligations to the country. I think its good when they do do important things, but I feel that by no means do they have to (though I think its a terrible waste when they don't).
Reagan, Nancy Reagan.
Post a Comment