Gay Sex Charges Hot Political Tactic
In the wake of the McGreevy and Foley scandals, allegations that candidates for office are secretly gay seems to be catching on as a means of political warfare.
A scumbag blogger who specializes in “outing” allegedly gay Republicans proclaimed on the Ed Schultz Radio Show (the only mildly popular national liberal radio talk show) that Idaho Republican Senator Larry Craig has “engaged in same-sex sexual activity” with at least three different adults. Craig’s office terms the charge “absolutely ridiculous — almost laughable” and, as Ed Morrissey notes, Craig “has three children with his wife Suzanne, and nine grandchildren.” Still, the impossible to refute charge is now out there.
Meanwhile, desperate Ohio gubernatorial candidate J. Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican, has leveled a scurillous charge of his own: support for pedophilia.
It was the first gubernatorial debate in Ohio history, possibly the United States, in which one candidate accused the other of being applauded by the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).
J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican candidate for governor who is trailing by double digits in most polls with three weeks until the election, went on the offensive in the fourth and final debate Monday night against Democrat Ted Strickland. And like the rain that fell on the Channel 10 television studios and the spin tents pitched outside, Blackwell never let up during the one-hour debate nor in the aftermath during a rousing question-and-answer session.
To recap, Blackwell said Strickland did not vote for a resolution condemning sex between adults and children as a U.S. congressman. That vote led NAMBLA, an organization that promotes sex between adults and consenting minors, to applaud Strickland, Blackwell said. Blackwell also said Strickland knew, employed and traveled with a man convicted of exposing himself to young children in Washington and Athens counties. “It goes right at his judgment,” Blackwell said.
[…]
The Democrat reiterated he never knowingly employed anyone in his campaign or congressional office that did not share his same values. But he does acknowledge a former employee was convicted of exposing himself.
As for the resolution, Strickland said he did not vote for or against the idea, but instead was recorded as present. He said he supported a number of the ideas in the resolution, but could not vote yes because it contained a sentence he did not agree with. That sentence, Strickland said, stated that sexually exploited children are unable to develop healthy affectionate relationships in later life, have sexual dysfunctions and have a tendency to become sexual abusers as adults. Strickland said he did not believe that as a human being or psychologist, and he also believes God would not condemn a young victim to never having a chance to lead a normal adult life.
Just when you thought politics couldn’t get any lower . . .
Wait till Blackwell decides his opponent is ineligible and removes him from the ballot.
Well at least Blackwell will be gone in a couple weeks.
I don’t understand why the pro-pedophilia charge is so bad. Republicans from G.W. Bush on down accuse Democrats of being pro-terrorist all the time. It’s what they’ve been running on since 9/11.
Pug, please quote the speech in which George W. Bush stated are pro terrorists. A link will do, or a date and time of speech. If you cannot do so, you will forever be known as the liar you are.
Blackwell is correct. Strickland is a scumbag. Support for NAMBLA? That is SICK!!!!!!!!! Why why why would he support that gross org.? WHY? Hmmmm…..
Christopher: There’s ZERO evidence Strickland supports NAMBLA. He didn’t vote for a meaningless resolution and NAMBLA praised him for it. That’s hardly the same thing. For all I know, the KKK endorsed Blackwell for his stance on affirmative action.
James, what r u talking about???
This was a vote! “Strickland did not vote for a resolution condemning sex between adults and children”
Why in the world would he or anyone not vote for it? OMG! This isn’t right or left, R or D, liberal or conservative. It’s common sense to vote against an O-R-G-A-N-I-Z-A-T-I-O-N who has a despicable criminal agenda-one that goes against any definition of modern human morality. Tell me what good reason (besides the BS he gave) for NOT voting against it. Tell me please James what you would view as a good reason.
I haven’t studied that political race deeply and can’t tell u who the best man for the job is, but based on just the NAMBLA issue, I would say it would be reprehensible for Strickland to be elected dog catcher, let alone the US Congress.