Oct 11 2009

Pity Poor Polanski

Category: character,virtueamuzikman @ 3:38 pm

The L.A. Times reports today that “Roman Polanski is depressed and in an “unsettled state of mind” as he begins his third week in a Zurich jail, his attorney told two Swiss newspapers.”

Gee that’s terrible.  I wonder if Samantha Geimer ever had any bad days after Polanski raped and sodomized her when she was thirteen.

Of course many in the film business have circled the wagons around one of their own.  The list of signatories to the petition “demanding” the release of Polanski is appalling in it’s length.  To think there are this many humans on earth who believe Polanski’s resume’ trumps his despicable actions is simply nauseating.  Perhaps all of those who signed the petition would like to send one of their young children over to meet the “great” director – alone – at Jack Nicholson’s house.  Whoopi Goldberg will be there as acting chaperone, so no parent need worry.  There will be no “rape-rape” while Whoopi is in the house.

But I do wonder if Polanski will actually be extradited…  I wonder if he will serve jail time…  I wonder if he will be sodomized while in jail…

Well, if he is, at least we know it won’t be “rape-rape”.  And if his attacker plays his cards right, a long list of celebrities may sign a petition demanding HIS release!

UPDATE: Dennis Prager has an excellent article on this same subject.

24 Responses to “Pity Poor Polanski”

  1. Mark Converse says:

    Well said. My son Josh found himself in the middle of a lefty frenzy over this very topic in a class at College of the Canyons this past week. He listened to the Whoopi inspired babble for a while. Finally he raised his hand and said firmly: “No one is above the law. Period”. End of story.

  2. harmonicminer says:

    Sounds like you raised him right!

  3. dave says:

    FWIW… many people on the left have been just as critical of Polanski. I know that doesn’t really fit into the lefties=evil paradigm, but lets not pretend that all on the left, or even a majority, are supportive of Polanski.

  4. Paul Bahn says:

    Your comments are right on the money Dave. I do feel sorry for Mr. Polanski though. Not for his current plight but rather, for his twisted perspective on life and love.

  5. amuzikman says:

    Dave

    I’m not sure what you are referring to. (bad grammar) Unless you didn’t bother to read my post you will note I was referring specifically and only to those who are signatories of the referenced petition to have Polanski released. There is no “paradigm” present, neither is there any “pretending”. However, since YOU brought it up – Would you like to lay a little wager on the where those petition-signers lie in the political spectrum. (Hint: NOT on the right)

  6. dave says:

    I’m not sure what you are referring to.

    I was referring to Mark’s comments, not your comments.

    Would you like to lay a little wager on the where those petition-signers lie in the political spectrum.

    No… I didn’t say that no one on the left was supporting Polanski, did I?

  7. amuzikman says:

    Dave

    No you didn’t. Neither did I. But I notice you didn’t respond to my offer of a friendly wager either. ;< )

  8. Old Cop says:

    If the D.A. can get the victim to testify against Polanski (I have read she has forgiven him long ago), Polanski is looking at minimum 16-20 years in the State Prison and an additional 4 to 8 years for each count of each sexual crime he committed. I don’t know what the penalty is for leaving the country to avoid prosecution (might even be a federal crime). He is looking at some rather hefty fines also. His actor friends could very well influence the extradition case and that could go on for years.

  9. Bill Colton says:

    Where are the womens rights groups? Why are they not up in arms? Where are the victims rights organizations – why are they not up in arms? I am very disappointed that we are not standing up for the victims in this country any more. Once again, we see a lot of people standing up for the perpetrator. It is amazing to see this over and over with such symantic justification. It ISN’T Rape Rape…(does no mean no? or no no?). It isn’t abortion abortion – it is choosing. We can’t let those poor criminals live in such crowded conditions – poor things. What about the rape victim – what about the unborn child, what about the criminal victim? What about the message we give our kids? Is no one else outraged about this?

  10. amuzikman says:

    In my opinion this is modern-day liberalism at its worst. A philosophy of excusing literally anything in protection of one of their own. We saw it with the Clinton/Lewinski affair, we see it now with the many ethics problems of Charles Rangel, we saw it with a laundry list of Obama appointees, and sadly we see it with pathetic Hollywood types like Roman Polanski, Wooddy Allen and David Letterman. We become numb to the outrageous because it happens with greater frequency all the time and it feels like we will be perpetually outraged if we respond strongly to each occurrence. I don’t know the answer to your question but I do know doing nothing is not an option.

  11. dave says:

    Where are the womens rights groups? Why are they not up in arms?

    They are… some of the loudest voices against Polanski have been the feminit blogosphere. NOW has also been vocal in their opposition of Polanski.

    Lots of people, including many “liberals,” are outraged about this.

    To pretend otherwise is being blatantly dishonest.

  12. dave says:

    A philosophy of excusing literally anything in protection of one of their own.

    FWIW, I can give just as many examples of conservatives/Republicans protecting their own.

    But instead you would rather use an example of a handful of “liberals” justifying Polanski to make silly stereotypes, while completely ignoring that the same kinds of things happen on the Right.

  13. amuzikman says:

    OK, Dave

    Show me somewhere, anywhere that a group of conservatives have initiated and signed a petition demanding the release from jail of a fugitive child rapist conservative/Republican. I dare you to find anything so stupid from someone on the right as as Whoopi Golberg’s outrageous statement in defense of Polanski. In fact, don’t even bother – there is no such example. The only thing silly here is your feeble twisting of what has been said to try and claim there is some sort of political/moral equivalence to be found with the Polanski child rape, and those LIBERALS who defend him. And contrary to your assertion the same kinds of things do NOT happen on the right. It all sounds so trivial and pat when you refer to them as a “handful” and then enclose the word LIBERAL in quotes. What you don’t seem to understand is the degree to which many people find the petition reprehensible, almost as much as Polanski’s despicable act. And, the list of signatories is without doubt made up of people on the political left, including several who are financial contributors to the Democratic Party.

    Are there liberals who have expressed outrage at Polanski? Yes. Are there conservatives who have organized an expressed support of Polanski? No. Therein lies the difference, and it is profound.

    Let’s put it another way. Where is the petition, signed by any in the entertainment leftist elite that condemns Polanski?

    Those who are making comments here are ignoring nothing and are being “blatantly dishonest” about nothing. The subject is Roman Polanski, the petition demanding his release, and those LIBERALS who signed the petition.

    And what about you, Dave. Your comments here seem to indicate a greater desire to defend the left than to condemn Polanski. What does that say about you?

  14. Bill Colton says:

    I think this goes way beyond conservative and liberal to the core of the moral fibre in our country. We have strayed from the bible as being a foundation of moral (and spiritual) standards. We have traveled to get rid of God in our schools, the ten commandments in our public areas and ridden the horse of moral relativism. Now we stand here, defending someone for getting a little girl high and raping her because the individual has talent…and isn’t that more important to defend. Rape isn’t rape….if it isn’t Rape Rape….try to explain that to your daughter on her next outing with adults.

  15. amuzikman says:

    You’ll get no argument from me. But it is certainly illuminating at the very least to see who it is that tries to defend this child-rapist. It might just be something to think about the next time you go to the movies, or rent a movie. You spoke of outrage. Imagine enough people with enough outrage to stand up and say “No!” to the Whoopi Goldbergs and the Martin Scorseses of this world.

  16. Bill Colton says:

    I agree…we all need to vote with our pocketbooks, our priveledge in elections, our voices. I remember Francis Schaefer in A Christian Manifesto speaking of the sin of silence. We need to be silent no longer.

  17. dave says:

    The only thing silly here is your feeble twisting of what has been said to try and claim there is some sort of political/moral equivalence to be found with the Polanski child rape, and those LIBERALS who defend him.

    Huh? I claimed nothing of the sort.

    And what about you, Dave. Your comments here seem to indicate a greater desire to defend the left than to condemn Polanski. What does that say about you?

    WTF? It says absolutely nothing about me. I think that Polanski is a scumbag. And I think those that defend Polanski are naive at best, and scumbags at worst.

    But go ahead an imply otherwise. I mean… why deal with what I actually say when you can make things up and use innuendo to personally attack me?

  18. amuzikman says:

    Dave

    Let me try to rephrase with better grammar. I was responding to this statement, made by you:

    FWIW, I can give just as many examples of conservatives/Republicans protecting their own.

    I don’t disagree with you. In a general sense, every group engages in political CYA. But that is certainly not what is happening here and to trivialize the Polanski petition as just another example of a group trying to protect their own is frankly appalling. This, as Mr. Colton has pointed out above, speaks to something much deeper than politics, much more a reflection of fundamental morality, or lack thereof. And I repeat my challenge. Show me an example of a similar situation in which a conservative/Republican has committed an act such as this, that then generated a petition among other conservatives demanding his or her release from jail. You and I both know there is no such comparison. In fact, what you will find is condemnation from fellow conservatives when something even remotely like this takes place.

    You also said:

    …but lets not pretend that all on the left, or even a majority, are supportive of Polanski.

    No one has made such an assertion. But my response is that ONLY among the left can one find people who would agree to sign such a petition, claiming his body of creative work somehow cancels out his terrible crime. Furthermore I did not bring up the subject of the left vs the right – you did.

    You have stated Polanski is a “scumbag”. And the petition signers are somewhere between “naive” and “scumbags”. I’m glad to hear you say so, though I am hard pressed to imagine the former . But, do you not see how this contributes to a sense that the political left in this country is morally bankrupt?

  19. dave says:

    But that is certainly not what is happening here and to trivialize the Polanski petition as just another example of a group trying to protect their own is frankly appalling.

    Actually… you are the one who used it as an example of just another example. Let me quote:

    We saw it with the Clinton/Lewinski affair, we see it now with the many ethics problems of Charles Rangel, we saw it with a laundry list of Obama appointees, and sadly we see it with pathetic Hollywood types like Roman Polanski, Wooddy Allen and David Letterman.

    You compared them, not me. And I simply responded to that list by saying that the Right does the same thing – Vitters, Ensign, Stanford, etc.

    But, do you not see how this contributes to a sense that the political left in this country is morally bankrupt?

    No… I think it points to a bunch of people protecting their friend in the industry, and that it has little/nothing to dop with the “political left.”

  20. amuzikman says:

    Dave

    You have chosen to twice ignore my challenge to you. Unless your response is the three names you mentioned in your last comment. Of course these have little or no comparison to the Polanski issue – the drugging, raping and sodomizing of a 13 year-old girl, then fleeing prosecution – in case you forgot.

    Vitters – a man who hired prostitutes, Ensign – a man who had an affair, Stanford – a man who engaged in investment fraud. All worthy of condemnation. But where is the petition demanding their release from jail? And where are the apologists who say theses men should be forgiven their crime because they have done such good work elsewhere?

    You may continue to assert this Polanski petition does not reflect on the shared politics of the petition signers but that doesn’t make it so.

    a bunch of people protecting their friend in the industry…

    I guess we’ll leave it at that.

  21. dave says:

    You have chosen to twice ignore my challenge to you.

    You are right – I have chosen to ignore it, because I am not interested in it.

    Of course these have little or no comparison to the Polanski issue – the drugging, raping and sodomizing of a 13 year-old girl, then fleeing prosecution – in case you forgot.

    I am well aware of what Polanski did. And I never compared what he did to what the others did. As I have already said, and you have chosen to ignore, I named those in response to your list of people who also were involved in things that were not comparable to what Polanski did.

    You may continue to assert this Polanski petition does not reflect on the shared politics of the petition signers but that doesn’t make it so.

    And your continued assertion DOES make it so?

  22. harmonicminer says:

    Dave, simple yes or no question:

    Did ANYONE on the right from Hollywood sign the pro-Polanski petition?

    If not, doesn’t that demonstrate that it is ONLY the Hollywood left supporting him? And doesn’t that demonstrate that the shared politics ARE the issue, not mere “let’s support our friend” thinking?

  23. dave says:

    Did ANYONE on the right from Hollywood sign the pro-Polanski petition?

    Not that I am aware of.

    If not, doesn’t that demonstrate that it is ONLY the Hollywood left supporting him?

    No. It means a portion of Hollywood, who also identify with liberal politics, support Polanski.

    And doesn’t that demonstrate that the shared politics ARE the issue

    No.

  24. harmonicminer says:

    Dave…

    I think any reasonable reader will conclude that you just admitted what I said, even if you didn’t want to.

Leave a Reply