tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post1868270943333200476..comments2024-02-24T00:37:43.087-05:00Comments on The Other McCain: Follow-on Mound-o'-links Just Roars AheadRobert Stacy McCainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084541621503669804noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-74406212838930829822009-08-09T13:06:39.917-04:002009-08-09T13:06:39.917-04:00@Chad,
No, I think he was hammered because of the ...@Chad,<br />No, I think he was hammered because of the children. What consenting adults do is their business, but the content of the remarks hinted at possibilities that do not sit well with average parents.<br />If you don't have children of your own, it is possible that some of the nuances may elude you.<br />Griffin doesn't get the benefit of the doubt, once the remarks are discovered.smitty1ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06559464300318848169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-88648698916205928502009-08-09T11:16:13.680-04:002009-08-09T11:16:13.680-04:00You might build an argument that the First Amendme...<i>You might build an argument that the First Amendment permits him to dress and act like Rob Halford, and citizens will agree, just not around the children of those citizens.</i><br /><br />Is there any evidence he was doing that? Not from what was posted here or at Riehl World View, although Riehl World View did a damn good job of accsuing the guy of being a pedophile without offering a shred of proof. <i>Short Dan Riehl "I have have read Jesse's blog posts and analyzed his thoughts, using a technique I have no training in but have once discussed with a guy who does, and I have concluded that Jesse wants to have sex with 5 year old boys" </i><br /><br />If he was making the statements that were on his blog to the kids in his class that would be problematic. If he was directing the kids in his class to his blog for some reason, such as information about homework assignments, then that would also be a problem. I haven't seen any evidence of that. IF (and this is a very big if based on the evidence presented) he engaged in any sort of inappropriate behavior with children he should be prosecuted.<br /><br />What you are doing is utilizing the Clinton argument "It's for the children. Won't someone please think of the children?" When in reality this has nothing to do with the children it has to do with getting back at this guy because he slimed Palin. As I said that's cool - go for it, but be honest about it. <br /><br />As for how effective you were in countering this guy - it's debatable. Yeah he quite as a kindergarten teacher but after all the build-up what was actually revealed was laughable. Literally I laughed. I thought there was gonna be some huge revelation about how this guy had been in the employ of the Obama campaign or something similar and what do we get? Some guy who likes to jerk off and makes stupid statements like If sex isn't nasty you aren't doing it right. <br /><br />Finally let's get back to the children for a minute - As I said before isn't it the parents responsibility to be monitoring their internet usage. What the hell is a grade schooler doing on myspace by themsleves? I have a lot concern about parents who let their kids run rampant on myspace, where believe me I can find things a lot more inappropriate than the posts under discussion, than I do about a 49 year old guy posting about his the philosphical underpinnings of his daily ritual of self-abuse.Chadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15083359852310707247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-71882260725962753992009-08-09T07:36:08.811-04:002009-08-09T07:36:08.811-04:00@Chad,
"obviously a lying sleazeball but last...@Chad,<br />"<i>obviously a lying sleazeball but last I checked that in and of itself wasn't illegal</i>"<br />The benefit of the doubt is an order of magnitude smaller where kids are concerned.<br />You might build an argument that the First Amendment permits him to dress and act like Rob Halford, and citizens will agree, just not around the children of those citizens. A line is crossed.smitty1ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06559464300318848169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-23184911525017163412009-08-09T01:34:13.139-04:002009-08-09T01:34:13.139-04:00Nice roundup, and great job overall. And, thanks f...Nice roundup, and great job overall. And, thanks for observing us at Pumas4Palin, we adore the lady!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-56316106176608362252009-08-09T01:30:50.293-04:002009-08-09T01:30:50.293-04:00Actually I didn't miss the fact that he was ar...Actually I didn't miss the fact that he was around / teaching kids. Here is what I said:<br /><br /><i>Yeah the guy is obviously a lying sleazeball but last I checked that in and of itself wasn't illegal and yeah the stuff he is putting on his blog isn't appropriate for kindergartners but again not illegal and isn't it the parents responsibility to review site content before they let the precious little ones visit. When you have proof of him making death threats against the Palins or actually attempting to bugger school kids get back to me until then he is just another liberal douchebag with a hate-on for Sarah Palin.</i><br /><br />From what I have seen there is no indication he has acted inappropriately around kids. If he has then obviously yes he should be fired / prosecuted. <br /><br />As far as it being a shot over the bow. Cool go for it I just think you are wasting your time on the wromg target.Chadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15083359852310707247noreply@blogger.com