Roman Polanski: Child raping degenerate

In 1977 Roman Polanski drugged and raped a thirteen year old girl. It wasn’t must  mutual consent, statutory rape, either.

After drugging the barely-teenaged girl, Polanski forced her into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; vaginally raped her as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could rape her anally, to which she replied, “No,” then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.

What Polanski did wasn’t just merely illegal. What he did puts him in the company of the most vile and sick degenerates on our planet. For the last thirty two years he’s evaded justice after fleeing the United States. But now that he’s finally been arrested and detained (in Switzerland, awaiting extradition proceedings), Polansksi’s fellow immoral degenerates in Hollywood and on the Liberal left are howling in outrage about the “unfairness” of Polanski’s arrest.

And in doing so, the are excusing and siding with a man who drugged and raped a little girl.

John Nolte at Big Hollywood has a thorough write up about Hollywood uniting behind Polanski:

Pleading guilty to unlawful sex with an underage girl — the drugging, raping and sodomizing of a 13 year-old — isn’t stopping Hollywood from ginning up an indignation campaign over the possibility of fugitive director Roman Polanski being held accountable for his crimes. Yes, these are the values of those who control the most powerful propaganda device ever created.  Which begs a question: If his unspeakable deed doesn’t meet the standard, what exactly would Roman Polanski have to do in order to become a pariah in this town … I mean, besides vote for Sarah Palin?

I’m convinced that the level of immorality in Hollywood is probably a bit lower than the average maximum security state penitentiary in California.

AllahPundit at Hot Air has more in his post Celebrities, diplomats unite behind convicted child-raping degenerate:

If there was substantial misconduct, why not come back to LA and litigate the matter at an appellate level? Answer: Because Polanski and his cretinous supporters don’t care if he’s guilty or not. They want him to walk free, in the name of “art,” without another word spoken on the subject.

Not all Lefties…Kate Harding at Salon has a scathing piece:

Polanski was “demonized by the press” because he raped a child, and was convicted because he pled guilty. He “feared heavy sentencing” because drugging and raping a child is generally frowned upon by the legal system. Shore really wants us to pity him because of these things? (And, I am not making this up, boycott the entire country of Switzerland for arresting him.)

As ludicrous as Shore’s post is, I have to agree with Fecke that my favorite Polanski apologist is the Washington Post’s Anne Applebaum, who finds it “bizarre” that anyone is still pursuing this case. And who also, by the by, failed to disclose the tiny, inconsequential detail that her husband, Polish foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski, is actively pressuring U.S. authorities to drop the case.

If you defend Polanski or think he shouldn’t be brought back to the US to face a life in prison for what he did, then you’re a vapid and immoral degenerate too. There really is no gray area on this one.

______

Lots more discussions over at Memeorandum.