Sphere: Related Content
As Scott pointed out in my post the other day about the debacle that is Alvin Greene in South Carolina, I left out the best part. That part being that the aforementioned Mr. Greene was charged with one felony count of, what the AP reports to be, "...showing obscene Internet photos to a University of South Carolina student, then talking about going to her room at a university dorm." Now, I don't know if that's the official charge (it seems rather lengthy) or if that's just what happened, but the bottom line is that our buddy, Clem, here, is the nominee for a Senate seat and does weird things in his spare time. Allegedly.
Let's look into the accusation a little more closely. Again referencing the story over at the AP, it would seem that a one 19-year old Camille McCoy, who is described as a "rising sophomore at the University of South Carolina", alleges that while in a computer lab, Greene sat down next to her "...and asked her to look at his screen, which showed a pornographic website." First of all, what in the world is a "rising sophomore"? Is that supposed to imply that she will one day be a junior after she "rises" in the ranks? Seriously, what's up with that little moniker there, AP guys? A rising sophomore. OK, fine. Call her what you want.
But second, what's with the being able to view porn in the university computer labs? Most of the people I know can't even view Facebook from work because their fascist employers have blocked access to it (not to mention anything streaming, which sounds like it would probably include porn sites). You know what college kids want to do in computer labs? Look at porn, that is correct. You know what college kids want to do when they're not in computer labs? Look at porn, that is correct. You know what half of the Internet consists of? Porn, that is correct. Now, I'm not blaming the university, but I am suggesting that they block the porn.
But back to the allegations (which I have no reason to disbelieve that he actually did, as he seems dim enough to have pulled such a stunt). Who does that? You sit down next to some chick and pull yourself up some good ol' computer porn and say, "Look at this! Look at it!" (I'm not certain of the specific vernacular that was used. I'm merely paraphrasing.) That's a strange ranger right there. Granted, the mascot of the University of South Carolina is the gamecock, it's still no excuse for this sort of behavior.
The article goes on to document that, according to Miss McCoy, "I said, 'That's offensive,' and he sat there laughing...It was very disgusting." Hold on there, sweetheart. You look at his screen o'porn and you said, "That's offensive"? No, you didn't! What 18-year old would say it like that? You mean to tell me that you didn't call him a pervert? You didn't shout out "Oh, my God!" (Or "OMG!" as kids your age are pretty into the whole texting thing.) I find it difficult to believe that you said, "That's offensive." I'm not saying it wasn't offensive. It certainly sounds offensive. I'm just saying I highly doubt that's how you handled it.
She goes on to state that "He said, 'Let's go to your room now.' It was kind of scary. He's a pretty big boy. He could've overpowered me." Could have overpowered you? Right there in the middle of the computer lab? Granted, the kinds of folks that are usually hanging around the computer labs aren't exactly your broad shouldered, strapping lads or anything like that. But I find it hard to believe that's what went through your head at the time. Sounds like she handles things very pleasantly in her little world.
I found this next part to be the most interesting, yet it's the part that's getting the least attention. "McCoy, who is from Charleston, said she was stunned to learn that the same man she later identified from a photo lineup was running for office, much less had won a party's nomination." First of all, why do we need to know that she is from Charleston? Who cares? Why tell me inconsequential information, AP? Why? I know, I know! It's because the media sucks. I get that. But usually it's because they're not putting in enough information, rather than inserting crap that isn't even relevant to the story. Was the author of this piece under some sort of minimum word count requirement or something?
But that's not the most interesting part (it's merely the most annoying). If she was identifying him from a photo lineup, where did the police get his photo? If he was arrested before, that would be a pretty good reason for the cops to already have a photo of him, yes? I would think so. So ,how come I'm not hearing about what else he may have done before his potentially storied career as a US Senator? Oh, right. Back to the media sucks. Never mind.
This is a very strange thing to be accused of. It's an even stranger thing to do. It's unfortunate that no one had ever heard of this guy (before he won the nomination) because if they had, perhaps background checks would have been done and people would have wanted to vote for someone that they had never heard of without a pending felony charge as opposed to who they did vote for, someone that they had never heard of with a pending felony charge. And as weird as it sounds, this guy is pretty weird. He doesn't seem real bright, either. But he's the nominee for the Democratic Party for a Senate seat in South Carolina. U-S-A! U-S-A!!