Jim Webb's Imagination

Why is Jim Webb running for the Senate?

Instead of following a "Mr. Webb Goes to Washington" path, I think heading to Hollywood would be much more lucrative for him.

I would think that Webb would be extremely successful writing for TV and movies.

If his novels are any indication, the man's imagination runs wild with ideas that Hollywood would surely love to lap up.

I hope his works are purely products of his imagination and aren't based in his real life experiences.

Assuming that they are only creations from Webb's head, they are still weird enough to be of serious concern.

No, they're beyond weird. They're downright creepy, especially the passages that border on child porn and incest.

George Allen brought Webb's little known writing talents to light late yesterday.

From Drudge:

The press release, as provided by the Allen Campaign:

WEBB’S WEIRD WORLD

The Author’s Disturbing Writings Show a Continued Pattern of Demeaning Women

· Some of Webb’s writings are very disturbing for a candidate hoping to represent the families of Virginians in the U.S. Senate.

· Many excellent books about the United States military and wartime service accomplish their purposes, and even win awards, without systematically demeaning women, and without dehumanizing women, men and even children.

· Webb’s novels disturbingly and consistently – indeed, almost uniformly – portray women as servile, subordinate, inept, incompetent, promiscuous, perverted, or some combination of these. In novel after novel, Webb assigns his female characters base, negative characteristics. In thousands of pages of fiction penned by Webb, there are few if any strong, admirable women or positive female role models.

Why does Jim Webb refuse to portray women in a respectful, positive light, whether in his non-fiction concerning their role in the military, or in his provocative novels? How can women trust him to represent their views in the Senate when chauvinistic attitudes and sexually exploitive references run throughout his fiction and non-fiction writings?

· Most Virginians and Americans would find passages such as those below shocking, especially coming from the pen of someone who seeks the privilege of serving in the United States Senate, one of the highest offices in the land:

– Lost Soldiers: “A shirtless man walked toward them along a mud pathway. His muscles were young and hard, but his face was devastated with wrinkles. His eyes were so red that they appeared to be burned by fire. A naked boy ran happily toward him from a little plot of dirt. The man grabbed his young son in his arms, turned him upside down, and put the boy’s penis in his mouth.”

Bantam Books, NY, 1st Edition, 2001, (hard cover), page 333.
Quote is from para. 10,.Chap. 34.

– Something to Die For: "Fogarty . . . watch[ed] a naked young stripper do the splits over a banana. She stood back up, her face smiling proudly and her round breasts glistening from a spotlight in the dim bar, and left the banana on the bar, cut in four equal sections by the muscles of her vagina."

William Morrow and Company, Inc., NY 1991, 1st Ed. (hardcover), p. 36.
Avon Books, New York, 1992 (Mass-Market paperback edition), p. 35
Quote is from para. 29, Chap. 2 “The South China Sea,”, Section 2

– A Country Such as This: "[He] could see Jawbone and Ashley Asthmatic [two guards at a Vietnamese prison camp] napping together in the grass. They faced inward, their arms entwined. It looked like they were masturbating each other. It didn't surprise him. … It was common to see men holding hands, embracing, playing with each other. Some of them [the guards] had wanted him. He could tell in those evanescent moments between his bao cao bow, the obligatory deference when a guard entered his cell, and the first word or blow that followed it… Quick, grinding voices, turgid with repressed passion. An exploratory reaching of the hand near his groin…”

Doubleday & Co., Garden City, NY, 1983 (hardcover); page 396.
Bluejacket Books, 2001 (Trade paperback edition), page 396
Page numbers are the same in the Naval Institute Press (paperback) edition, 1983.
Quote is from fifth para, Part 5 “A Country Such As This,” Chap. 24, Section 1

It goes on with many more passages, but I think that's enough. You get the idea.

(There's more here if you're interested.)

Eye-opening, isn't it?

Maybe jaw-dropping is a better word.

The libs are already crying, "Foul," over this and trying to prop up Webb.

Read this utterly lame article from The Washington Post.

It is a lengthy probe into the "real" Webb, the reluctant candidate.

His imperfections are romanticized. He's a brooding artist, uncomfortable in a crowd, kind of an outsider, a maverick.

The article mentions his novels. Of course, it doesn't mention that they include some really sicko stuff.

James Webb will tell you that he is first a writer, with several best-selling novels to his name.

...Jim Webb did better with his fists than his schoolbooks, but he also wrote poetry and short stories. Although Webb later embraced such 20th-century masters as Ernest Hemingway and Graham Greene, the writers who spoke to him early on were journalistic observers such as John Steinbeck and James A. Michener. The latter's "Hawaii," in particular, captured his imagination as a teenager.

...After Webb's wounds forced him from the Marines, he went to Georgetown University's law school. There he felt the sting of contempt from antiwar classmates and faculty. He also began to write.

His first novel, "Fields of Fire," appeared in 1978, featuring as the protagonist Lt. Robert E. Lee Hodges Jr., who was a Kentuckian like Webb's grandfather and shared his name. The book went against the current of the times, offering a slap at the era of malaise and pacifism that some called the "Vietnam Syndrome." Webb's novel, for all its cautionary asides on bloodshed, teaches that no other experience is as terribly profound as combat.

I don't understand how The Post could run this article "as is" after the disgusting passages from Webb's novels are flooding the New Media.

There is absolutely no mention of the luridness of his writing.

I suppose the Left will say that Webb isn't a creepy guy. He's an artist, a storyteller extraordinaire. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the sicko passages have served to solidify the Left's support for Webb and energized the extremists.

He speaks their language.

With these passages out there, it will be nearly impossible for the Dems to sell Webb as a man beyond reproach to mainstream Virginians.

Wholesomeness doesn't seem to be very near and dear to Webb's heart.

I do think that it's legitimate for Allen to criticize Webb's writings.

They are a reflection of what's going on in Webb's head.

I don't think he's Senate material, certainly not if the Dems really care about the children.

I wouldn't trust Webb around the pages; and we know that the safety of the pages is one of the most pressing issues of our time. Right?

Also in today's Post, there's a discussion of smear tactics being used this political season.

Entitled "The Year Of Playing Dirtier," the article focuses on negative ads and decries the sorry state of politics.

Excuse me?

The Post is one massive negative ad campaign meant to attack Republicans.

Speaking of playing dirty, The Post staged an all-out assault on George Allen because he said "macaca." Unsubstantiated reports of Allen's allegedly racist behavior were seized upon by The Post and published as truth.

And now, The Post tries to pull off this holier-than-thou stance.

How hypocritical!

The Post's complaints about the dirty tactics of this campaign season are so ridiculous because The Post is part of the problem, one of the main offenders.

It's just as disengenuous as Webb making a claim that he respect's women or vows to uphold family values.