Letterman Flings Slime at 14-Year-Old Willow Palin

[AllieBaba]

Hopefully the admin screens your pms carefully for grooming behavior.

Not only can the admin not read PM's, the only people here who seems interested in "grooming" anyone are those with an obsessive focus on a 14 year old's sexual behavior, wouldn't you say? How is that different than Ted Haggard's condemnations of homosexuality?

The admin and the moderators can read pms.

Are you breaking a sweat?

 

[Sinatra]

Thank you for the shades of rape performance!

Oh what a dance of excuses you are mustering for us all!

Not much brilliance to be found in you - but sheer effort to be sure.

You work hard - much like a dishwasher...

As far as I can tell, not much brilliance comes from you; you lacked the capacity to even begin to comprehend the comments I made yesterday about the nature of wage labor and capitalism's anti-libertarian elements.

Regardless, it's entirely irrelevant. If he'd made a funny joke about full-fledged rape, I still would have laughed. Have you not heard of dark humor? That said, drawing some equivalence between statutory rape and violent rape is undoubtedly an insult to actual rape victims, as opposed to those merely declared rape victims by an intrusive government that discriminates on the basis of age rather than ability.

My God - I cannot believe you are actually offering up a defense of underage sex.

And on a public forum no less.

Good Lord.

 

[AllieBaba]

Ah, now you reveal your desire for underage sex!!!

Keep talking Agno - reveal yourself to the rest of us.

No wonder you found no offense in Lettermans sexual demeaning of a 14-year old girl...

Actually, Dinatra, the fact that such a topic could even be utilized as a target of dark humor reveals its taboo nature. If I had some interest in its "normalization," then it would be entirely nonsensical for me to defend its use as a source of dark humor.

No, I thought I could get you in prison if I could get somebody to investigate you.

As far as freedom of speech goes, I'm all for it. I've never once said you belong in prison for saying children should be available for sex, or for telling me you fantasize about children in classrooms....I think you belong in prison for being a babyraper. Not for talking about it.

I hope that all you do is fantasize about it.

No, you're not, and have several times falsely claimed that I "advocate illegal activity." You just don't realize that free speech is far more expansive than you seem to think it. For instance, I couldn't win a libel suit against you, even though you've written bullshit lies on here about me. See how that works?

You advocate sex with children, let's just be frank. And sex with children is illegal.

Talking about it is not.

Perhaps you need a breather.

 

[AllieBaba]

Thank you for the shades of rape performance!

Oh what a dance of excuses you are mustering for us all!

Not much brilliance to be found in you - but sheer effort to be sure.

You work hard - much like a dishwasher...

As far as I can tell, not much brilliance comes from you; you lacked the capacity to even begin to comprehend the comments I made yesterday about the nature of wage labor and capitalism's anti-libertarian elements.

Regardless, it's entirely irrelevant. If he'd made a funny joke about full-fledged rape, I still would have laughed. Have you not heard of dark humor? That said, drawing some equivalence between statutory rape and violent rape is undoubtedly an insult to actual rape victims, as opposed to those merely declared rape victims by an intrusive government that discriminates on the basis of age rather than ability.

My God - I cannot believe you are actually offering up a defense of underage sex.

And on a public forum no less.

Good Lord.

This is nothing new.

 

[Sinatra]

As far as I can tell, not much brilliance comes from you; you lacked the capacity to even begin to comprehend the comments I made yesterday about the nature of wage labor and capitalism's anti-libertarian elements.

Regardless, it's entirely irrelevant. If he'd made a funny joke about full-fledged rape, I still would have laughed. Have you not heard of dark humor? That said, drawing some equivalence between statutory rape and violent rape is undoubtedly an insult to actual rape victims, as opposed to those merely declared rape victims by an intrusive government that discriminates on the basis of age rather than ability.

My God - I cannot believe you are actually offering up a defense of underage sex.

And on a public forum no less.

Good Lord.

This is nothing new.

I am sickened by this.

That line "basis of age rather than ability".

WTF??????

So a 10 year old with "ability" is ok to engage in sex with an adult????

Agno - you need some help. You are MESSED UP.

KittenKoder and all the rest - this guy was helping defend your position regarding the tasteless and sexist Letterman comments regarding a 14 year old girl being raped and engaged in prostitution.

Congratulations to the kind of support you all attracted on this issue.

 

[del]

Hopefully the admin screens your pms carefully for grooming behavior.

Not only can the admin not read PM's, the only people here who seems interested in "grooming" anyone are those with an obsessive focus on a 14 year old's sexual behavior, wouldn't you say? How is that different than Ted Haggard's condemnations of homosexuality?

The admin and the moderators can read pms.

Are you breaking a sweat?

no, generally we can't. we can only read them if they're reported/forwarded by a member.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Making a joke about a grown man having sex with a 14 year old girl is totally vile and sick, but actually forcing a 14 year girl old to marry a grown man as part of a cult ritual is perfectly fine. I mean, who does't know that?

I reported this post because you changed my words and pretended they were still mine. Fucking lying piece of DOG SHIT.

 

[Sinatra]

Making a joke about a grown man having sex with a 14 year old girl is totally vile and sick, but actually forcing a 14 year girl old to marry a grown man as part of a cult ritual is perfectly fine. I mean, who does't know that?

I reported this post because you changed my words and pretended they were still mine. Fucking lying piece of DOG SHIT.

This thread got real strange when Agno came out in support of underage sex.

I went from pissed at Letterman to genuinely creeped out.

That shit ain't right.

 

[Agnapostate]

The admin and the moderators can read pms.

Are you breaking a sweat?

Neither the admins nor moderators can read PM's, and the admins can only delete them. Babble, dear, how long ago was it that you were confused about what a reputation comment was? Do you really think you know more about how vBulletin forums are operated than I do?

My God - I cannot believe you are actually offering up a defense of underage sex.

And on a public forum no less.

Good Lord.

I've been willing to tolerate the occasional derailing idiocy because I have an interest in discussing the main topic at hand, but I am getting rather tired of this little game. Let me explain to you why I do and do not advocate and then hear you run your idiotic mouth.

It's my belief that youth in Western society are excessively infantilized, particularly adolescent youth. To express this quickly and concisely, I'd go with John Darling's observation that "[there is a] common-sense perception, endemic in our culture, of children as rather silly and immature, unfit to be given responsibility. Yet such a view is clearly in danger of being self-confirming; for where children are seen as silly and immature, they will not be given responsibility, and where they are not given responsibility, they are likely to remain silly and immature." Now, to that end, I oppose minimum age restrictions, such as the voting age, working age, etc. Now, if I believe that the age of majority of 18 is arbitrary, and that people should simply manage their own lives at whatever age they prove themselves capable of doing so, why the fuck would I exempt sex from that? Why would I specifically eliminate the age of sexual consent from that list? Why go through that inconsistency?

Now, I'm going to show you what one of your little rightist heroes believes, and we'll see if you call him a "supporter of underage sex." Straight from former Speaker Newt Gingrich, we have Let's End Adolescence.

It's time to declare the end of adolescence. As a social institution, it's been a failure...[t]he solution is dramatic and unavoidable: We have to end adolescence as a social experiment. We tried it. It failed. It's time to move on. Returning to an earlier, more successful model of children rapidly assuming the roles and responsibilities of adults would yield enormous benefit to society.

Now, are you prepared to condemn NEWT GINGRICH as a "supporter of underage sex"? Are you prepared to do that, idiot? Because, hell, there's scarcely an iota of difference between what he believes and what I believe about the social institution of adolescence? So let's hear it! Let's hear you condemn Newt Gingrich for the same!

You advocate sex with children, let's just be frank. And sex with children is illegal.

Talking about it is not.

Perhaps you need a breather.

That's simply a lie. I've never advocated that people have sex with children. I've said that adolescent youth should enter adulthood sooner, and that those that have proven themselves capable of managing adult rights and responsibilities should manage every aspect of their lives, including their sexual behavior. So...ARE YOU PREPARED TO CONDEMN NEWT GINGRICH, BABBLE?!

 

[Sinatra]

Agno, you can wrap it up in whatever reasoning you can formulate - the fact remains you are advocating underage sex.

You are a moral fuckwit.

 

[AllieBaba]

In other words, children should be able to have sex.
Gotcha.

 

[manifold]

Sinatra,

Do you support freedom of speech?

YES or NO, that is all that is required.

Here's your chance, honesty or cowardice.

Yes I do.

And I will utilize said freedom to state that Letterman's "humor" was one of the most classless, disgusting, hateful examples on a network station I have yet seen.

So you support his right to say it? YES or NO?

Do you support sexual humor involving 14-year old girls? Humor centered on rape and prostitution? We are not discussing the right of such content - but the content itself.

I support funny jokes... by laughing at them. Sue me.

 

[Agnapostate]

Agno, you can wrap it up in whatever reasoning you can formulate - the fact remains you are advocating underage sex.

You are a moral fuckwit.

In other words, children should be able to have sex.
Gotcha.

O NOEZ!

Are you moronic little trolls not up for the challenge? I merely await your declaration that Newt Gingrich is "advocating underage sex."

Actually, can I just accept it as it is? It stands to reason that you'd have to condemn Newt Gingrich as advocating the same...so I'll run with that. From this moment forward, Newt Gingrich shall be known as an advocate of underage sex as long and to the same extent that I am.

 

[manifold]

Making a joke about a grown man having sex with a 14 year old girl is totally vile and sick, but actually forcing a 14 year girl old to marry a grown man as part of a cult ritual is perfectly fine. I mean, who does't know that?

I reported this post because you changed my words and pretended they were still mine. Fucking lying piece of DOG SHIT.

I quoted a fictional fellow named RetardedGaySarge. Any resemblence to real retards of USMB renown is purely coincidental.

 

[AllieBaba]

Agna, the mods and pms have the ability to read pms. They state they won't unless ordered to do so by a court of law...but the ability is there.

"PM Guidelines:
If exclusively personal contact is needed, use the Private Message system. Do not post a topic where only one member is expected to answer. Posting and Language guidelines extend to the PM system. USmessageboard.com maintains the privacy of its’ users and will not access Private Messages unless ordered to do so by a Court of Law."

 

[Agnapostate]

Agna, the mods and pms have the ability to read pms. They state they won't unless ordered to do so by a court of law...but the ability is there.

"PM Guidelines: If exclusively personal contact is needed, use the Private Message system. Do not post a topic where only one member is expected to answer. Posting and Language guidelines extend to the PM system. USmessageboard.com maintains the privacy of its’ users and will not access Private Messages unless ordered to do so by a Court of Law."

Even del, far from an ally of mine, just told you that mods and admins did not have the ability to read PM's (unless forwarded to them), and you're actually stupid enough to keep up this little idiocy?

 

[American Horse]

Who cares? It's not as though she was injured or hurt, and as with generally irreverent and dark humor, it's precisely the taboo nature of the subject that makes it funny.

None of that makes it funny, or if it does it is it’s to such a small and irrelevant audience that Letterman's advertisers won't get much advantage from it.

I'm not saying that it was funny, or not sleazy, but it was a joke, nobady got hurt, and I would hate for there to be some sort of law the limited one making jokes even in poor taste. I hate PC, but I think its funny that the Rightwingers are going ape shit over a tv comedy show and a joke in poor taste when the Rightwingers are so adamant about defending the freedom of speech and being against PC.

We don't need or advocate a law; what's appropriate is the publics condemnation of so called comedy like Letterman's by speaking up and boycotting products he advertises.

Contessa Brewer vs. John Ziegtler on David Letterman’s Palin jokes

John Ziegler’s interview of Sarah Palin

John Ziegler on The View answering question about Palin Interview

 

[Agnapostate]

None of tht makes it funny, or if it does it is it’s to such a small and irrelevant audience that Letterman's advertisers won't get much advantage from it.

I didn't claim otherwise. It was funny based on its own merits, but the rightists in this thread are claiming that it was morally wrong in some sense, an assertion that they haven't proven.

 

[AllieBaba]

How strange, because a mod told me they could read pms, long before Agna started piddling around here.

And from my perusal of the rules, I don't see any indication they can't.

Having been the admin of my own message board, I KNOW they have that ability. You can't "opt out" of the ability to access PMs. It's part of being an admin, and depending on the level of authority allowed, a mod as well.

Maybe DEL doesn't have the authority to access PMs, but believe me, the admin does. They state they won't USE that authority...

But "won't" and "can't" are two wildly divergent things.

Honestly, you sound a little nervous. So I must have hit a nerve with the commentary on grooming. Good.

 

[AllieBaba]

None of tht makes it funny, or if it does it is it’s to such a small and irrelevant audience that Letterman's advertisers won't get much advantage from it.

I didn't claim otherwise. It was funny based on its own merits, but the rightists in this thread are claiming that it was morally wrong in some sense, an assertion that they haven't proven.

Morality, as you should be aware given your own weird take on things, is completely subjective. You can't "prove" immorality unless you come to some sort of agreement what morality consists of.

So those of conservative values who think his comments were immoral have no obligation to "prove" they're immoral. Though we all know that sex between adults and children is ILLEGAL...as is child porn. That's a little different.