Ted Nugent and daughters admitted he molested children

[dArKeR]

Saturday I saw a show, 'Daughers of Rockers' (something like that), on some cable station. The daughers said that their father was bringing home, (having sex), with very young girls, younger than they were. Nugent admitted it.

I demand a Prosecuting Attorney investigate this.

1. Skakel was investigated on the words of a herion addict that heard something while high 30 years ago.

2. Michael Jackson. The Christian White Man going after the Black Man?

[rocktivity]

1. "Michael Jackson. The Christian White Man going after the Black Man?"

What black man?

:headbang:
rocknation

[Jackpine Radical]

8. Well, he USED

to be black.

[eissa]

2. Don't bother

I'm still shaken up from a thread several days ago defending pedophiles. Seems our "big tent" includes sick freaks.

[Az]

6. You miss read it if thats what you thought

There was no defense of those that act on their desires to harm children. The society has every right and needs to defend itself from predators. The position was that we need to better understand the nature of what is going on so we can help these people before they become predators. By demonizing them we simply drive them underground and cause more children to be harmed. If your need for maintaining a facade of social indignation is so great that you are willing to sacrifice a few children then perhaps we need to look elsewhere for monsters. Mob justice is not justice.

[eissa]

10. I didn't misread anything

I read post after post looking for signs of humanity, and instead found messages that said pedophiles "are not directly responsible for their actions" and that those who go after them are "psycho." I consider myself a very tolerant person, but that snaps at those who harm childeren, including Ted Nugent.

[kanrok]

12. You're kidding, right?

There are people here who DEFEND pedophiles? Please let me at them.

[Pithlet]

51. No

That's not what happened in that thread. No one defended pedophiles.

[eissa]

56. Yes they did

Of course, they did not come out and say "these people have the right to act on their sexual desires, even if it means they take 4 year old kids and place their dicks up their ass." It was more like "we should sympathize with those mentally disturbed" and/or "they were once victims themselves" and other bullshit like that.

[Az]

15. The problem being addressed by that thread

was two fold. On the one hand the initial question was one of did the vengence motiffe of some go overboard. There were individuals who fantacized about the acts of vengence they would take on people they beleived to be pedophiles. Some were extreme to say the least.

Taking into account the existance of such people the other issue being probed was one of tolerance for individuals with such drives that did not act on them. With such hostility arrayed against anyone that even suggests they are attracted to children do you think anyone would dare raise their hand in a plea for help? They would be drawn and quartered before their hand fell again.

Sexual desires are not choices. There are unfortunates that are drawn to inappropriate obsessions. Either you seek to understand the problem or you are part of the problem.

There is not suggestion that children should not be defended. But a witch hunt is not the solution. Yes if someone harms a child we must remove that person from ever being able to do so again. But we have to help them before it comes to that. This is where the demonizing hurts the children. It drives them underground. It keeps them from finding help. Instead they find children. That I cannot tolerate. Can you?

[DrWeird]

28. Horse shit. bull shit. And total shit.

I said the mentally ill are not directly responsible for their actions. i.e. if you're mentally ill and commit a crime you should be in a hospital and not a prison.

Franky, it was you who said they would gleefully watch molestors being tortured. And not only is that wholly unamerican and unconstitutional, it rather succintly fits the "psycho" label of what that whole thread was about.

[eissa]

35. Funny how you use the word "shit" so often

given that you're full of it. And, yes, I WOULD watch those who sexually assualt children get tortured, I WOULD take part if I could, and I WOULD take great pleasure in it. So there.

[DrWeird]

36. Sort of proves my point.

The original question was "who is more perverted" and you pretty much answered that one.

[eissa]

37. Yeah, that's it

I'm more perverted than some sick freak who CHOOSES to anally fuck some 3 year old kid, but those that defend these monsters, oh no, they're "protecting the constitution." :eyes: You're part of the reason we have to keep our kids indoors.

[DrWeird]

38. hey, if you don't love american you can get out.

If you've got a problem with the constitution, take it up with the founding fathers. They were against torture too.

"You're part of the reason we have to keep our kids indoors."

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x380271>

I guess that means you're part of the reason this kind of thing happens. Good thing you weren't involved in the case.

[eissa]

40. I love that line

I usually hear it from repukes. Since my family are immigrants, any criticism of this administration is usually met by that brainless response.

[Az]

41. Back this down and lets deal with it rationally

Yes, its a very emotional issue. But we can either let the ape parts of our brains run wild or we can sit down and work things out rationally.

One does not choose what one has desires for. They occur in a number of ways. You as much choose them as you choose what flavor icecream you like. Unfortunately sometimes these obsessions can go against society. Sometimes it is a minor social issue and society would be better off growing up and learning to accept that what two consenting adults want to do together is really their own business. But other times it involves children who cannot and are not able to give their consent.

It is in this case that society must press its collective nose into someones business. But it must do so rationally and not emotionally. It is necissary to protect children because they cannot yet protect themself. But this does not mean we turn into skrieking banshees at the merest hint of someone being attracted to children. We must act but we must act with understanding of the matter at hand. These are people who have aspects of themself they did not choose to have.

If the environment is not made safe for people to address this problem they will not surface. Pedophiles do not grow convieniant horns for us to recognise them by. If they do not come forward on their own the only way we discover them is after they harm a child.

You tell me. Should we continue to howl for their blood if it means the remaining individuals will never come out and seek help because of our attitudes? If they remain hidden how should we pursue them? What invasions of privacy of everyone are you prepared to make?

[eissa]

43. Come on!

Will you guys (and for some reason, it's a lot of guys doing the defending around here) stop acting like I'm out to drill holes in the heads of some men who get their kicks looking at pictures of Britney in a Catholic school-girl outfit? I'm talking about Richard Davis, who snatched Polly out of the safety of her home, fucked her and murdered her. I'm talking about the bastard who grabbed five year old Samantha, in broad daylight, out of the playground of her apartment complex, fucked her and discarded her naked body on the side of the road. I'm talking about the man who kidnapped a seven year old boy, tied him face down on the bed, ducked taped his mouth to muffle his screams, and sodomized him for the next couple of days until he died.

Misplaced mercy, that's all I have to say to you and the aptly named "DrWeird."

[Az]

45. And we are talking about

How to make sure that never happens again. Understanding the process by which they came to that horrible place is necissary in order to prevent it. They did not wake up one day after a lifetime of normalacy and decide they were going to become monsters. Figure out how they got there and make sure no one ever winds up there again. Solutions vs Reactions.

[eissa]

49. Reaction is the Solution

someone linked an article from Slate stating that pedophiles do NOT respond to rehabilitation. This is NOT a mental illness that you are born with. It is CHOOSING to act upon a deranged urge. You act on it, you pay the consequences (unless we have people trying to convince the rest of us that the perpetrator is simply a victim of his desire....please :crazy:)

[Az]

55. Keep in mind

We are not suggesting we stop reacting upon their actions. They hurt a kid they go to jail. Do not forget that. Society will protect itself.

What we are talking about is getting to the matter before it a child is harmed. Reaction can only come after an event. That event is the molestation of a child. I trust you are for preventing harm to children.

We find ourselves in a precarious position. The how's and why's of what a person's happiness is derived are their's alone. As long as it does not harm another person without their consent. Thus the pedophile (one that has not acted on it)finds themself in a very unfortunate situation. They are pressured to stay hidden by a society hostile to their plight. This means they do not seek help for fear of running into individuals who would wish them harm.

For clarities sake. Someone that has desires or obsessions concerning children and has not acted on them is a person with issues opposed to our societal values. They did not choose to be the way they are. It is us that define them as an aberration. We should seek to help them change their condition if possible.

A person that acts on these desires becomes a criminal. They have chosen to override societies values and force their own desires on others. This is a crime. It is best if this can be avoided. But if it transpires society must stop it.

[iverglas]

57. solutions vs. reactions

... problem-solving vs. blaming ... prevention vs. punishment ...

Not the sort of thing that's popular on Jerry Springer, is it?

The harm reduction approach just isn't as much fun as the stockade.

.

[brainwashed_youth]

67. I'm guessing

that you didn't support the ACLU when they defended NAMBLA. That's ok. I understood that they had to defend everybody's right to free speech, but I pretty much lost all respect for the ACLU after that.



and no, you're not more perverted than the sick bastards who anally fuck a defenseless child. I'd take joy in watching them suffer too.

[eissa]

68. Thanks sweetie

Defending the defensless only weakens the cause of the truly expolited.

I still respect and support the ACLU, even though I obviously was at odds with their defense of NAMBLA.....:puke:

[htuttle]

13. Fascinating...

In a thread devoted to exposing a right wing icon's admission of pedophelia, you take the opportunity instead to bash DU and accuse US of being sick freaks?

Nice try.

Off with you...

[eissa]

16. Read that thread before attacking me

and I'd like to see those who were oh-so-concerned for the rights and well-being of these monsters now defend Ted, who also happens to be a rw nutcase.

BTW, I'm a proud member of DU and didn't accuse everyone of being sick; just those who defend child rapists.

[Az]

20. Ted is a hypocrite

Don't see a problem bashing Ted here. He harshes on others for their failings and hides his own. If he has harmed others in pursuit of his obsessions he should be removed from society. See how that works.

[eissa]

22. Therefore,

if Ted CHOSE to harm others, that would make Ted responsible for his actions, and thus he should be removed from society, right? If I understood your post correctly, then I'm quite relieved.

[Az]

24. Yes

You harm someone all sympathy and pity gets suspended. You go to jail. You do not pass go.

[iverglas]

44. y'know, I read it

I saw:

- a distinction being made between "pedophiles" and "child molesters".

There is a distinction, just as there is a distinction between "people who drool when they see pizza" and "people who eat pizza".

Pedophilia, as I believe was explained in that thread, describes a sexual preference, generally regarded as disordered. Child molestation describes an act.

Some people act on their preferences, some don't. In all areas of life. Some people are virtually unable to resist the urge to act on their preferences. Some pedophiles never molest a child. Some child molesters are actually not pedophiles.

I'm not suggesting that "merely" consuming child pornography is not "acting", by the way. It is in fact very arguably participation in child abuse.

I believe that one points made was that we do not take action against people for what they are, if they have not done anything. A pedophile may be no more able to control his/her preference, what s/he responds to, than you or I could avoid drooling at the sight of pizza. That is what s/he *is*, and that may well be none of our business, as long as what s/he *does* is not something we justifiably do not tolerate.

The other point made was that in the case of a genuine mental illness (which pedophilia most often is *not*), a person may not be responsible for his/her actions: may not appreciate the nature and consequences of those actions. That principle applies to any child molester who is genuinely mentally ill in that way just as it applies to someone who kills a stranger in the psychotic belief that the stranger is Satan and has come to take him/her to hell.

In any event, I did not see anyone defend child rapists. Suggesting that someone who commits an act may not be criminally responsible for it is not "defending" that person in the sense in which you mean it: approving his/her actions. And unless someone can quote something to that effect, where someone defended/approved sexual assault on children, I think that claiming that anyone did that is really uncalled for.

Of course, I also think that anyone who expressly approves of things like torture really ought not to be calling any kettles, existent or non-existent, anything at all.

.

[chiburb]

Aw jeez, Iverglas....

There you go again. Do you HAVE to throw a bucket of cold logic on EVERY thread you visit? Do you have some hidden agenda here? Like to maybe raise the level of discourse?
Unbelievable... I'm going back to the Lounge...

;)

[Pithlet]

53. But nobody defended child rapists.

You are totally misrepresenting the views in that thread. And I am a mother of two young children who believes that children have a right to be protected from pedophiles.

[Must_B_Free]

59. There was no thread defending pedophiles

That is your own distorted characterization of a thread that questioned the mental sanity of some of the vigalantes going after pedophiles.

[eissa]

62. "...questioned the mental sanity of the vigalantes"

but not the perpetrators. Demonizing the (far) lesser of two evils.

[Pithlet]

64. The thread wasn't about the perpetrators.

It was about the vigilantes, and what drives them to do what they do. Therefore, comments were made in response to that subject. To automatically assume that anyone who questions those motives must be pro-child molestation is a huge jump, and is in no way logical or rational.

[DenverDem]

3. Ted Nugent is psychotic.

His supercillious addiction to blood sports is indicative of his psychological disorders. Pedophillic episodes are no surprise. He needs to take a "Journey to the Center of the Mind" in an institutional setting.

[chiburb]

4. So how old were they?

I mean are these 23 yr old daughters saying Teddy was doing a 20 yr old? OR...
Were the daughters 16 or 17 and Daddy was doing a 13 yr old?

In other words, legal or illegal?

[dArKeR]

32. It needs to be investigated! I think that's the point: Dem. investigate

Repuke, forget about it.

[Bluzmann57]

5. Absolutely!

Nugent(or anybody) molesting youngsters is some seriously sick shit and this is one of the few things I agree with the righties about. That boy should be in the Michigan state penal system if all of this is true. If someone tried that with his kids, he would undoubtedly threaten to hunt them down.

[hexola]

7. I love how Ted brags about how Drug-Free he is...

At least OZZY, STEVEN TYLER etc...can blame thier bad behaviour on drugs and alcohol...

Nugent was a filandering pedophile ass - stone cold sober!!! That says alot about the man.

[KharmaTrain]

9. No surprise, he's a mysognist & possible pedophile

Take a listen to the Nugent "library"...lots of songs about women as sex objects...especially the young ones (Hey Baby, Coming Of Age). For years he's gotten a pass for his whacko wingnut views cause he has/had so many fans...the dude did play a mean guitar.

A sidenote: In 1990 I met Mr. Nugent...he was doing a local hunting and fishing talk show. The night before he has performed with Damn Yankees and was sitting in the studio the next morning at 6am...wide awake and ready to talk bow hunting.

The highlight of the show was when the phone lines were opened and a caller asked the Motor City Madman if he took his wife on hunting trips...he said "well...you don't wanna leave your poontang behind"...damn I missed that 7 second delay...:spank:

[slappypan]

11. Courtney Love

Courtney claims to have had a sexual encounter w/ Ted at the age of 13. As far as I know he doesn't deny it and has made jokes about it.

[radwriter0555]

19. Yeah, she's real reliable. She also didn't deny she was pregnant with

russell crowes' child which she miscarried, and it wasn't his; nor did she deny that marlon brando was her dad.

She's fu**ed up.

[DEM FAN]

14. Gotta Love Those Repub Family Values. The Repub Party. Don't Do

What We Do..Do As We Say. :-(

[tom_paine]

17. No surprise that Bushevik Poster Boy is a child molestor

After all, pedophilia seems to be popping up in a lot of Repugs lately, Giordano from Connecticut and of coruse, Susan Smith's molesting dad, Beverly...big Christian Coalition bigwig and it's no wonder.

[chiburb]

18. TP, I gotta ask you...

I always read what you post, because I usually find myself in agreement. :-)

BUT: "No surprise that Bushevik Poster Boy is a child molestor"

May I ask where you've heard or read that other than in the OP, which is unaccredited let alone linked?

Personally, I think this thread should be locked until the 'rumor' is sustantiated...

On edit: Do you think Nugent would admit on "some cable show" that he molested children? This whole thread is a joke...

[RandomKoolzip]

21. Hear, hear.

Let's get some corroboration before we start jumping to conclusions.


Even if he ISN'T child molestor, he's still an asshole.

[chiburb]

25. Agreed. n/t

.

[rocktop15]

23. Child Molestation isn't a partisan issue....ITS WRONG.

Anybody that can, with a clear conscience, try to defend a child molester is ignorant and foolish in my book. I am a very liberal individual but there are certain things I don't agree with (gay marriage to be one--but it's not THAT big of a deal for me). I don't care why anyone touches a child. There's no justification for it. The voice of reason does not apply here. They should be hauled off to jail and then, while in prison, go to a therapy program. Society doesn't need sick freaks walking our streets with a mindset such as theirs.

[chiburb]

26. Thank you for your contribution...

May I ask where you heard that Nugent is a child molester?

Thank you.

[dArKeR]

27. After admitting it Nugent said, 'Hey, I'm a breeder' and laughed.

[chiburb]

29. After admitting what????

He admitted that he was a child molester?

Please respond to post #4....

[tom_paine]

46. Getting closer to some sort of link/corrboration

The show itself was on E! and is called (I think) "Daughters of Rock Stars: True Hollywood Story"

http://www.eonline.com/On/Holly/Shows/RockStarsDaughters/

Now to find a transcript if one exists or some other corroboration...

[dArKeR]

60. Yes, that's the show I saw. Thanks!!!

[Nlighten1]

33. It isn't a rumor

Try to catch the VH1 special about Ted Nugent they actually touch on this issue. Apparently back in the 70's he was dating a fan of his who was 16. When the news got out it cost Nugent some of his fans.

[tom_paine]

39. Mmmmmmm...good point

You're right, chiburb.

It is an unsubstantiated rumor. I suppose that I am less that skeptical regarding unsubstantiated rumors regarding Busbeviks.

Quite frankly, when they make something up it is innoculated into the minds of millions due to their mulit-billion dollar Lie Machine.

Unfortunately, non-Imperials can hardly get our TRUTHFUL opposition points out to thousands.

Given this situation, let us say I am predisposed to give the Freepers, Dittoheads and assorted Brownshirts (though I repeat myself) the same "benefit of the doubt" as they give Democrats.

The VERY SAME.

[chiburb]

42. Ok, I can accept 'fire with fire'...

But even Drudge provides SOME evidence or a link...

Anyway, I hope the "story" is true, I hope it isn't true, but in the meantime I'll wait for substantiation.

Later.

[noonwitch]

30. It depends on how old the girls in question were at the time

If they were over 18, it's not illegal. Scummy, perhaps, especially if his daughters were around the same age and he was over 40, but not illegal.
I hate Nugent and would love to see him arrested if any of the girls were underage. At least he can afford to pay whatever punitive damages he would end up with by the end of all the legal proceedings.

[chiburb]

31. Jeez. I asked the same thing in post #4, but people...

Would rather rant and argue than answer a basic question...

[CO Liberal]

34. Yes ... and He IS The NRA

When you think of the Nuts Ruining America, remember that this sick bastard is one of their leaders.

[tom_paine]

47. LINK TO THE SHOW IN QUESTION!

http://www.eonline.com/On/Holly/Shows/RockStarsDaughters/

It also has a real-time link you can watch the show and see what exactly is said.

I don't have time to do this, but if anyone does, could they report back here?

[chiburb]

52. I don't have time either, but don't you think...

That if E! had a world-exclusive they wouldn't publicize it? Even if it were something damaging to a wingnut?

Sometimes we hear what we want to hear...

[tom_paine]

61. Sorry, but that "do you think" question does not apply to Imperial Amerika

"Do you think that the National Media would report on the Lewinsky Affair without EVEN ONCE MENTIONING 'The Arkansas project' and all the rest of the shady, interconnected, slush-fund, RICO-violating organizations behind it?"

"Do you think that a multi-faceted, concerted effort to block minority votes and stuff wealthy vacation home votes and dozens of others of strategies could possibly go under- or un-reported during a two month period of a disputed national election?"

"Do you think it's possible for Gary Condit to get raked over the coals 24/7 for months would be possible while completely blacking out the Lori Klausutis Story, with it's highly newsworthy corrupt coronor lying about the cause of death for 3 weeks?"

And so forth...

No, I wouldn't think those either.

But only in a Free Nation with a Free Press.

Imperial Amerika is/has neither.

[chiburb]

63. Agree with everything you said...

My point was I think it's all about $$$. If you could blow the socks off the world with an exclusive interview that has Nugent admitting to child molestation, wouldn't you milk it for all it was worth?

That's why I think this thread is bogus. We WANT to believe Nugent is guilty of what so many are accusing him of that we aren't the least bit discerning in asking for some corroberation of what someone THINKS he saw on television.

At least MJ and R Kelly were formally charged before the pile-on started. We're doing based on nothing.

[tom_paine]

65. And I agree with you...

So, we are having a veritable festival of agreement!

:toast: :party: :party:

You are right, but I don't care anymore.

Of course Nugent was banging underage girls.

That's all I need to know.

[DoNotRefill]

48. What's the statute of limitations on that?

There's none on murder....

[Sgt. Peppers]

50. No one holds republicans accountable.

Enough said.

[truthbetold]

54. Child molestors.

In my mind, they are some of the lowest, most disgusting people on Earth.
I knew I hated Ted Nugent for a reason.

[eissa]

58. Ahhh, new innocence

Run! Save yourself!

You obviously do not agree with our constitution. You are also extremely rigid and intolerant -- don't you have a place in your heart for the mentally disturbed? Are they so undeserving of your sympathy?

(Sarcasm off -- I totally agree with you, but many posters above do not.)

[smirkymonkey]

66. Not to mention the fact that his music

SUCKS A**! Just a few of the many reasons to hate Ted Nugent.

[Beaker]

69. not completely-

strangehold and stormtroopin' are still two great tunes. much beyond that, tho- you're pretty much correct.