[gidget7]

lurid or sexual in nature are one thing, incest and homosexual man and his little son sex is quite another!!!!!

Whether or not anyone agrees, most rationale people tend to hold politicians to a higher standard, as well it should be. Per the first amendment, supposedly this guy has the right to write whatever he wants BUT, This guy IS NOT public official of any kind, material. And people have a right to know of his writing, and not vote for him.

[MAD-AS-HELL]

Whether or not anyone agrees, most rationale people tend to hold politicians to a higher standard, as well it should be. We don't hold politicians to a higher standard. Maybe back in the 50's but our current crop of scumbag politicians (from both parties) put that notion to rest. Unless you argue that rational people no longer vote. WE elect some of the biggest hacks to represent us.

[FastCoyote]

"lurid or sexual in nature are one thing, incest and homosexual man and his little son sex is quite another!!!!! "

I'm writing a novel that has a couple of sex scenes in it, it's integral to the plot and no way around it. From my perspective, a writer has a choice about how and what he presents, especially anything sexual. The plot may well require something a bit off the wall, but if you are forced to go tho the extreme then the writer needs to be damn sure there IS context and explanation of what they wrote. There seems little indication that Webb used the quoted passage as anything more than gratuitous titillation. When you are that sloppy, then I can't feel sorry for the whirlwind Webb will reap.