« The Chav Pack | Main | Profiles in Countermoonbattery: Benjamin Netanyahu »

September 27, 2009

WaPo Columnist Is Outraged at Arrest of Child Rapist

As we've seen, the left was less outraged (indeed, not at all outraged) when ACORN was caught on video apparently willing to facilitate child prostitution. They were only outraged that a couple of conservative activists caught them.

This weekend, director Roman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland for the rape of a thirteen-year old girl that occurred in 1977. Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum thinks it "outrageous" that an award winning director was arrested for something so trivial as child rape.

She thinks the embarrassment and stigma Polanski has suffered is punishment enough. It's not, and that's not the point. Leftists also think Polanski should be given a pass because the woman who was the girl then has forgiven him and moved on. Good for her, but that's also not the point. The point is it's not okay for adult men to have sex with thirteen year old girls, even if the man is a famous director.

He's not the only child rapist to be warmly embraced by Hollywood. Director Victor Salva was convicted of raping the twelve-year-old star of his movie Clownhouse, but after serving his time was welcomed back to Hollywood to film Powder and Jeepers Creepers I and II, films that fetishize violence against adolescent males.

The elite left intelligentsia believe they and their ilk should be exempt from the laws that govern the behavior of lesser mortals. If it's a hick in Arkansas who date rapes a middle school girl, lock him up and throw away the key. But left-leaning film directors who garner the approval of the elite class... well then, as long as they embrace the proper leftist platitudes, the rules are a little different. It's only people like Carrie Prejean who are stigmatized by depraved Hollywood elites.

"It's OK, Little Boy. I'm a Hollywood Director."

Hat tip: AoSHQ

Posted by Gregory of Yardale at September 27, 2009 7:02 PM


Carrie Prejean: "I believe in traditional marriage between a man and a woman"


Roman Polanski: "So I raped a 13 year old and evaded arrest because I'm important."

He's suffered enough.

Posted by: AmericanToTheCore at September 27, 2009 8:28 PM

It's becoming way too easy to make the leftist idiots look like the idiots that they are.

Posted by: obamasux at September 27, 2009 8:38 PM

Like I've always said. Every single liberal policy is supplemented by a completely contradictory policy yet they hold that both are good.

Cognitive dissonance (doublethink) is a definitive trait of any and all leftists.

Posted by: AmericanToTheCore at September 27, 2009 8:40 PM

So why is the WASHINGTON COMPOST so worred that a hollywood pervert has been arrested for a rape he commited 30 years ago All rapists should get life with parole or any movie or book deals

Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER at September 27, 2009 9:04 PM

Wonder what the left would think if anyone but Anne's 'gay' lover anal raped her without an, um, strap on device. I think they would call it a hate crime.... yudda, yudda.

Just so everyone is clear on this (the above statement), I do not wish for her to have anal sex with anyone other than her gay lover.....

I'm just saying that if she quit being so 'gay' and had a young child, such as a daughter, and that young daugher was anal raped by some self important film maker, she migh 'have a fucking clue in life'.

Are we all clear on this? Root Cause Analysis = Anne is a gay dumb and stupid bitch who has no clue what it is like to be an adult, much less be a responsible parent of a female child.

Posted by: Oiao at September 27, 2009 9:49 PM

But, but, but, Buuuuuuush!!!!!!

Posted by: funkendunkel at September 27, 2009 9:53 PM

What a coincidence. The talk page of the Victor Salva article is also infested with moonbats condoning such behavior.

Skim the editor's rant downplaying Salva's molestation of a 13 year old boy, and then ask yourself if it is any surprise that Wikipedia is written with a heavy progressive slant, infested with euphemisms where it suits a liberal agenda, and generally unreliable for learning about the true depth of the crimes committed in furtherance of statist moonbattery.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at September 27, 2009 10:25 PM

I'm gonna leave up the Spam comment, just to see if wingnutlicker responds to it again.

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at September 28, 2009 3:52 AM

Hahaha, G of Y!

Countermoonbat, wouldn't you think that if you had to creatively dream up euphemisms, something is wrong? I guess it's up to us to stand up for what is decent and civilized.

Posted by: Karin at September 28, 2009 4:44 AM

In no way condoning the guy, but what's the point of a trial now? The victim doesn't want it, and the perp is too old to re-offend. Sure, you get a little vicarious vengeance, but is that worth dragging the victim through the mud again?

Posted by: hey you guys at September 28, 2009 4:51 AM

It is the law, the victim is not the concern of the law.

Posted by: Andrew at September 28, 2009 4:55 AM

hyg obviously missed the part in the post about it not being okay for forty-something men to rape thirteen year old girls. If we don't punish Roman Polanski for it, then how can we justify punishing anyone else for it?

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at September 28, 2009 5:09 AM

New Polanski movie: "Close Encounters With the Third Grade"

Posted by: JamesJ at September 28, 2009 5:23 AM

I suppose Polanski forgot to make a campaign donation to the Dems last year. Now, its really going to cost him. What was he thinking?
He'll pay big (make the check out to G. Soros) and some technicality will be found to get him off. Then the IRS will lighten up on the Swiss (a little baksheesh for the officials involved) for their help in getting a nice big donation for the Dem Party.
No presidential pardon necessary.

Posted by: Shooter1001 at September 28, 2009 5:43 AM

How many young men are sitting in prison right now because they were 18 and had consentual sex with a younger girlfriend? It does happen. Even a plea bargain and suspended sentence leaves them listed as a sex offender for life.
But they're not rich or famous, so who cares? Not Anne.

Posted by: Sassy at September 28, 2009 6:01 AM

Have you people read about this case? It's not about the rape. He already pleaded guilty to the charge. No, he feared the sentence from the judge so he fled the country. It's called unlawful flight to avoid the sentence.

Posted by: oldguy at September 28, 2009 6:02 AM

Obama's can pardon him

Posted by: Bob at September 28, 2009 6:23 AM

Oiao, well said!

Always remember one thing about the left - they have no moral system, they believe that no one should be judged because that's what those who believe in God do. And, we all know how stupid they are. /sarc

Posted by: Son of Taz at September 28, 2009 6:23 AM

I keep saying it, THIS WILL be the left's next great crusade as soon as they have the homosexuals properly installed into our society to suit them. PEDOPHILIA will be their next cause, "No LOW is too LOW" for the left. The only pretense the left has ever had in caring for children is to indoctrinate them in the schools.

Posted by: TED at September 28, 2009 6:26 AM

Posted by: TED at September 28, 2009 6:46 AM

"Sure, you get a little vicarious vengeance, but is that worth dragging the victim through the mud again?"
It's about justice, not vengeance. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, and all.
Guys like you are the reason why, even though liberals and conservatives are both needed in most fields of American politics to help provide an effective balance/ compromise to benefit everyone, liberals should be given as LITTLE control over our justice system as possible.
Here's another example:
Just a few years ago, an elderly man named Edgar Ray Killen was convicted of his involvement in the 1964 murders of civil rights activists Michael Schwerner, James Chaney, and Andrew Goodman. Killen was very old, and thus clearly "Too old to re- offend," as you put it, but does that mean he should be allowed to get away with what he did?

Posted by: Adam at September 28, 2009 6:48 AM

Polanski arrested in Zurich, Obama leaves for Copenhagen.

Posted by: blue at September 28, 2009 7:57 AM

Have you people read about this case? It's not about the rape. He already pleaded guilty to the charge. No, he feared the sentence from the judge so he fled the country. It's called unlawful flight to avoid the sentence.

Posted by: oldguy at September 28, 2009 6:02 AM

This is it. He was scared that what he did to the little girl was going to happen to him in prison. Must be one of those cognitive dissonance thingys going on again except, "Whats good for thee is not good for me".

Posted by: funkendunkel at September 28, 2009 8:19 AM

Ann Althouse links Patterico saying that Anne Applebaum neglected to mention that husband is a Polish foreign minister who is lobbying for Polanski’s case to be dismissed.

Posted by: Ed Flinn at September 28, 2009 8:29 AM


It is time to put the moral relativism away and understand that an 18 year old who has sex with his/her 17 year old consensual partner, with whom he/she has been consensually dating and associating with before is not even close to what Polanski did.

In fact, most states have "Romeo and Juliet" laws that make exceptions to crimes based on the age of consent when the age of the couple is very close. AoC laws were designed to protect naive children from predatory adults, not from other naive children.

Polanski was a predatory adult. He gave alcohol and Quaaludes to a 13 year old girl, then proceeded to force himself on her even as she mustered the last bit of mental resistance the drugs hadn't taken away. The age was wrong, the drugs were wrong, and the forced contact was wrong. That is not comparable in any way to two peers who agree to the contact, even though one of the peers is slightly below some arbitrary cutoff not designed to protect him/her from a peer.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at September 28, 2009 9:28 AM

I didn't read it as comparing the crimes, more of a statement as to the sentencing, or lack thereof. And Romeo and Juliet laws don't apply when the minor's guardian pushes the issue. Been there.

Posted by: Anonymous at September 28, 2009 2:41 PM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)