Whoopi Goldberg: What Polanski did was not “rape-rape”

Posted by: ST on September 30, 2009 at 12:40 pm

Her comments, blathered Monday on The View, pretty much speak for themselves:

I know it wasn’t rape-rape… All I’m trying to get you to understand, is when we’re talking about what someone did, and what they were charged with, we have to say what it actually was not what we think it was…

Initially he was charged with rape, and then he pled guilty to having sex with a minor, okay. And then he went to jail, and when they let him out, he said “you know what, this guy’s going to give me a hundred years in jail, I’m not staying.” And that’s why he left…

What we were talking about was what he did, and that’s what I wanted to clear up, and that’s all I wanted to clear up. ‘Cause I don’t like it when we’re passionate about something and we don’t have all the facts…

We’re a different kind of society. We see things differently. The world sees 13 year olds and 14 year olds in the rest of Europe… not everybody agrees with the way we see things…

Doesn’t sound like she – along with other Hollyweirdos – agrees with “the way we see things,” either.

Click the NB link for video of her remarks, and a partial transcript of the “rape-rape” victim’s testimony (warning for graphic content).

I laughed at this quote:

‘Cause I don’t like it when we’re passionate about something and we don’t have all the facts…

Ummm … Facts? The View? Anyone else notice the oxymoron of sorts here? ;)

In related news, Anne Applebaum, the WaPo columnist who was caught yesterday in a blatant conflict of interest over her apologistic error-filled column she wrote defending Polanski, has done herself no favors in her response to the criticisms of her defense of the famous child molester: she’s blaming the victim for the attack.

Have we “come a long way, baby“? I think not.

Update/Related – 1:33 PM: Patterico slams Applebaum again, this time for demanding a “correction” from him.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

26 Responses to “Whoopi Goldberg: What Polanski did was not “rape-rape””

Comments

  1. Severian says:

    Well, once again we see how “feminist” liberal feminists really are. Sarah Palin, demonize her because she didn’t abort her Down’s Syndrome child, and dares to think for herself and mindlessly parrot the party line! This poor child, why, she wasn’t really “raped” now was she? She asked for it, the slut! All those women who Bubba Clinton abused (and Ted “The Swimmer” Kennedy)? Not important, they asked for it, and besides, they have to sacrifice for the good of the liberal and Democrat heroes.

    Repulsive, disgusting, immoral, unethical, and a few more terms that are are not suitable for our lovely hostess’s blog. >:p

  2. These “feminists” are outrageously implying that the 13 y/o “consented” and therefore it wasn’t really “rape” and therefore it was “ok” for him to do what he did. I don’t know which one I find more disturbing – the fact that they don’t think it’s rape to begin with (especially after reading the victim’s testimony) or the fact that they appear to think so-called “consenual” (?) sex with a 13 y/o is ok.

  3. TaylorB says:

    This isn’t a ‘right/left’ issue, it isn’t political in the slightest, please don’t try and make it out to be.

    That filthy pig drugged and raped a child, he fled the country living all fat and happy instead of paying for his horrific crime, I don’t give 2 sh*ts how ‘talented’ he is, that sick twist belongs in jail. Whoopies comment flat out disgusts me, that girl was too young (and drugged as well) to give consent, not to mention she even said ‘no’ multiple times, if that isn’t ‘rape-rape’ than what is? Anyone who defends a rapist, a child rapist to boot, because he is ‘talented’ is simply repulsive.

    Oh, and not that it should matter one bit, I consider myself a proud feminist and tend to lean socially liberal, doesn’t mean I don’t have a moral compass… though it seems Whoopie and these others in Hollywood seem to be lacking one.

  4. Tom TB says:

    A 13 year old cannot legally consent to sexual relations with a 44 year old man. A 44 year old man cannot legally serve an alcoholic beverage and a controlled substance to a 13 year old, and have sexual relations either with or without her consent. What part of this does Whoopee not understand? Are foreign movie directors held to a different standard, in the Hollyweird mind? What if it had been a director who was politically conservative; would that change everything?

  5. LC Gregory says:

    To Tom TB’s comments, if the director had been politically conservative, well, there’s no Hollywood Forgiveness for Elia Kazan exposing Communist Party membership among some scriptwriters. But then, that’s something they DON’T want to do. Getting it on with cute 13 year-olds, well, I imagine Woody Allen is NOT the only one of Polanski’s outspoken defenders who has some exotic tastes…

    I thank TaylorB for her comment (as well as Jewel’s now-Famous Tweet), but I feel the need to point out – we’re not the one making this an issue. We just want to see the law enforced on a rapist and fugitive. It’s these Hollywood degenerates who have Rallied ‘Round The Perv who are making this an issue – and I’m not seeing very many Conservatives, Republicans, or even moderately Left-of-Center types in that list. There seems to be a hope that the Feds (i.e. Obama) will somehow intervene here on Polanski’s behalf. :-?

  6. Bill says:

    I could understand why a washed-up, has-been, never-had-talent, can’t even get a small walk-on part anymore light-weight like Whoopi Goldberg would defend Polanski hoping to score some suck-up points with other directors in Hollywood. But to me, the scariest thing about this whole pathetic attempt by the Hollywood elite to defend a child rapist and demonize the law enforcement authorities, is the fact that there are millions of people in this country who look to these freaks in Hollywood for their own guidance in life.

    And lets not forget these defenders of child rape in Hollywood are the same who whined and cried for 7 years, and continued to whine and cry, about George Bush “trampling on the Constitution rights” of Americans for having the FBI intercept suspected communication between foreigners outside the country and those inside the U.S. suspected of terrorism. Maybe they were really afraid the FBI might intercept their downloading of child porn over the Internet.

    Well, at least one small faint glow of hope coming from Hollywood was the audacity Kirstie Alley showed today by publicly criticizing those in Hollywood for attempting to defend Polanski. Way to go Kirstie! You are a hero for having the guts to stand up for the rights of children when the rest of Hollywood is happily “trampling on the Constitutional rights” of children.

  7. Brontefan says:

    These Hollywood types [celebs] are people that so many Americans want to emulate. It is amazing to me! These same folks have partied with Castro, Daniel Ortega, and Hugo Chavez. They are onboard with every anti-American idea and can’t wait for our full-blown decent into socialism/Marxism. I must own more than 400 videos, most of which I cannot watch anymore because of the past few years when all these celebs came out against our government, the war, and insisted that 9/11 was either government sponsored or we deserved it. I can no longer stand to watch anything with Danny DeVito, Susan Sarandon, George Clooney, or Jennifer Aniston. And the more anti-American rhetoric I hear, the longer the list becomes. I used to enjoy watching films with Danny Glover or Kevin Spacey; I never liked Sean Penn–so his behavior has not affected my film viewing. The last DVDs I purchsed were the Adams Chronicles and Adventures in English. Some of us are fed up with this progressive movement. I cannot stand The View and the only participant worth viewing is Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Last weekend I viewed Rio Bravo with such American icons as John Wayne, Dean Martin, Walter Brennan, and Ricky Nelson. John Wayne was an American patriot like Clark Gable, Jimmy Stuart, etc. Whoopi is dead-wrong! Rape is rape is rape. And he knew he was fleeing; we don’t reward illegal behavior.

  8. Lorica says:

    Actually this is a left/right issue. It’s not that we made it one, it’s because the left did. Remember Mark Foley?? Remember the outcry from the buffoons on the left who wanted to use this for their own political advantage…and use it they did. I consider what Polanski did far worse that what Foley did, which wasn’t actually criminal. Now some of the same people who screamed their heads of over Foley, are defending Polanski. This is idiotic, even if the girl forgave him, there is still the drug issue. He gave a qualude to a 13 year old girl. He should go to jail. Let him make prison films, if it was good enough for Johnny Cash, it’s good enough for Roman Polanski. – Lorica

  9. Severian says:

    I remember a good joke about Woody Allen, a picture showing him walking into a restaurant with his “daughter” who he married, captioned “Here we see Woody Allen taking his wife and daughter out for dinner.”

    Sick.

  10. ClassicFilm says:

    Any thinking female who is still part of the Democrat party really ought to analyze the direction this party has headed this past decade. And then run away screaming, never to return.

    This party does not value, but rather, DE-values women and minorities. Unless they’re rich, of course. And unless they’ve voted Democrat. Value is conditional and rationed, you see. Rich, Democrat women and minorities are valued, but average, non-Democrat women and minorities are not. Dangerous hypocrisy that should make any feminist’s flesh crawl, no matter her political affiliation.

    More outcry and concern has come from these wealthy prima donnas over the deserved arrest of an aging pedophile and child rapist than the tragic murder of a black honor student in Chicago. Warped priorities, always.

  11. Helen says:

    Since the girl in question not only could not have consented but actually kept saying no, we must assume that no does not always mean no. Depends on the perpetrator, I suppose. The whole thing is too yucky for words.

  12. Joseph Brown says:

    The day I take as gospel anything Whoopee has to say will be the day I start pushing up daisies in a clover field.
    She and the rest of the skanks on that slimey show have a combined IQ of a gnat!

  13. TaylorB says:

    Wow, I am amazed that anyone would actually make this a political issue. The rape of a child. Seriously? That is a terrible shame.

    From time to time people need to simply put politics aside, this case is one of those times, and if you can not see that than I am sorry for you.

    Child abuse does not belong to one party or another, be they rich, poor, educated, illiterate, doesn’t matter, ever. And to try and make it a political issue is offensive to the victims and their loved ones, who are certainly not worried about if the jacka$$ who drugged and raped their child was a Rep/Dem/Ind. If that would be a concern of yours in that case, get some help.

    Oh, and you can not equate this with Mark Foley… this is about a 13 year old child, who was drugged, and raped; he was an adult, totally different. Either way who in their right mind actually plays ‘your perverts are worse than our perverts’? That is probably the worst arguement ever posed.

    How can people be so partisan, on either side, that they actually lose their humanity?

  14. sarina says:

    It is repugnant to see the defense of a child molestor by the hollywood elite. I think, this issues speaks to deeper issues of the depravity of our society, that does not defend children’s rights.

  15. TaylorB says:

    Joseph,

    I agree. Once or twice I have landed on ‘The View’ whilst tv surfing when I was home sick with a cold, and it is horrid… the home shopping folks were more entertaining, and I did get a pretty good deal on a Foreman Grill as well.

    I guess I shouldn’t be too judgemental as I don’t watch that show, but it seems vapid and pointless, Whoopies (sp??) recent, idiotic, heartless comments seemed to confirm my theory. I would rather read the instructions on my shampoo bottle than listen to that motley crue attempt to explain the ins and outs of life to me.

    But to each their own.

  16. TaylorB says:

    Sarina,

    Part of me honestly, and sadly, wonders if these ‘elites’ simply want a part in one of his films. I am not sure how to feel about that, my distaste is palpable, but is it worse for the apologist or for the apologist who is basically an a$$ kisser trying to get a job with that nasty Oscar winning perve?

    They both make me ill, just not sure which one makes me sicker.

    He belongs in jail. Supporting his rape of a child is sick. Period.

  17. Carlos says:

    It’s strange that not one of the Polanski defenders (like Whoopi) has volunteered to get loaded and drunk, then let him rape and sodomize them.

    If it was such a non-meaning and innocent happening, I wonder why?

  18. Xrlq says:

    I think the worst part of Whoopi Cushion’s quote was not so much the infamous “rape-rape” line as her subsequent clarification that “What we were talking about was what he did, and that’s what I wanted to clear up.” Without that statement, it would have been unclear whether the “it” in “it wasn’t rape-rape” referred to the crime Polanski actually committed (forcible rape and sodomy of a 13 year old), or merely to the one he pleaded guilty to (statutory “rape,” i.e., sex with a minor). Saying the latter isn’t “rape-rape” would be defensible, unless your idea of a “rape-rapist” includes every 18 year old who has slept with his 17 year old girlfriend. But to claim that the act Polanski actually committed wasn’t “rape-rape” is beyond the pale.

  19. Kate says:

    Okay, Whoopie, you would be a very poor lawyer which is why you are an actor. A 13-year-old cannot sign a contract, cannot sign a consent form for medical treatment, etc. BUT, sex is somehow different for you liberals. They want kids to have sex…all kinds and for only one reason, personal pleasure. In this case it was a drugged kid for the pleasure of Polansky.

    Sex is the quickest way to get them into the liberal self centered mindset. So in Whoopie’s mind, all Roman was doing was liberating her. They are also setting the girl up as a “Lolita” of sorts….she single-handedly, teased, charmed and seduced Polansky into doing what come natural to a liberal, especially in the everything-goes 70’s. Theft of innocence has no market value to a film director, hence the director’s couch is an essential way to get ahead in Hollywood. Scum is scum and Rape is Rape, Whoopie.

  20. nina says:

    I wonder how good ol’ whoopie would feel if that was her granddaughter.

  21. Lorica says:

    Oh, and you can not equate this with Mark Foley… this is about a 13 year old child, who was drugged, and raped; he was an adult, totally different.

    Absolutely Taylor, I think Now you are finally getting it. My comment about Foley was not about “our perverts are better than your perverts”. My comment was about the treatment between the two parties. See the left celebrates their perverts..i.e. Barney Frank, Bill Clinton, and now apparently Roman Polanski. This isn’t about politics, it’s about the left’s hypocracy. It is about how the left screamed about Foley, and about how now they are defending Polanski. It was pretty obvious what I was trying to convey. This is just another incident of the many reasons that I will never vote for another Dem again. How can I stand in agreement with such idiotic behavior?? – Lorica

  22. Paul says:

    The people like Whoopi Goldberg make their morality a left/right issue, not the conservatives.

    When a republican does something much less egregious, he is OUT, off the reservation and fini. A congressman commits adultery with a consenting adult female (Rep. Livingston (R) of LA) and he is gone. Rep Stubbs (D)commits sodomy with a congressional page and he gets lauded by the left and reelected. Barney the Fag is the most powerful member of congress next to Nancy P. When a Ted Kennedy allows a young sex object to drown while he contemplates the repercussions, the press lauds him. Ted Kennedy American Hero. When Slick Bill gropes a woman who has recently lost her husband, the left and Hollywood attacks the woman. When Slick Bill repeatedly commits sexual harrassment, he is a hero to the left. When a Republican Senator Packwood is accused of the same he is ousted.

    The difference is a Worldview, the folks who condone sodomy, “gay Marriage”, group sex, i.e. feminism et al. (Whoopi, Barbara Walters,Woody Allen, John Kerry, Barack Obama) , have no serious logical problem with accepting child molesters (hmmm, might there be a connection?). Actually, an integral part of feminism is the acceptance of sodomites and by extension pedofiles – read Germaine Greer and Shulie Firestone and others.

    These people don’t care that a 13 year old girl is sexually attacked and brutalized (the liberals and Hollywood say “she was asking for it”). That is why I am not on the left, if you oppose crimes against children, you are on the right.

    What sheer, raw hypocrisy! Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters and the rest of the perverts love perversity. 13 year old girls who are sexually molested are much less important than their political agenda. (Whoopi and Barbara would gladly hold the little girls down for the fine producer – ‘serves her right’ (say Barbara and Whoopi) Where is Hilary on this?

    liars, frauds etc.

    Those who have experienced the “Treatment” from the monsters, know the situation. I wish I did not.

  23. Kate says:

    Well, Paul, the View and most of Hollywood seem to have cornered the market on hypocrisy. Reason being, there are no absolutes, no right nor wrong, plenty of gray area. Morality is not even on the horizon, only self centered pleasure.

  24. Jim P says:

    This isn’t a ‘right/left’ issue, it isn’t political in the slightest, please don’t try and make it out to be.

    Uh…yeah apparently it IS. I am not going to make nicey nice with my comments and thank the poster who has identified themselves as a feminist for their comments, because if she really CALLS herself a feminist these days she should have noticed how “feminists” are really just ah….’water carriers’ for the Democrat party. This is par for the course for “feminists” of the day who have repeatedly shown that “women’s RIGHTS” only apply to things that have to do with furthering Democrat agenda. This is not an isolated incident, and our poster should WAKE UP and quit being PART OF THE PROBLEM. Their is no mitigation here.