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.