Author Topic: Roy Moore  (Read 9526 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #60 on: November 20, 2017, 01:22:39 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17840
  • Tommy Points: 2390
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Quote
..presumably while getting keenly interested in talking about Nixon every time the issue came up.

My mom, who was a never say die liberal before that was cool (actually, she started when it was cool, then stuck with it when it wasn't) always said that the reason the nation kept getting more and more divided is that the democrats couldn't forgive the republicans for Nixon, and the republicans couldn't forgive the democrats for not having their own Nixon. And everything that's been going on in the two parties diverging farther and farther apart comes down to that.

They made a Community episode about it.

I think a lot of it politically comes from Nixon - you can trace Clinton's impeachment directly to that - but socially the division stems more from the civil rights movement and its continuing aftermath (which Nixon drew a lot of political capital from).

Growing up I never really understood why "card-carrying member of the ACLU" was a common attack line from a party that claimed to cherish Constitutional rights, until I realized "civil liberties" was code for "being forced to treat minorities as equal citizens".



On a different note, another woman has accused Al Franken of grabbing her butt during a photo in 2010. Apparently made a contemporaneous Facebook post about it too.

If this is true, A. it's no longer a one-off misunderstanding but a pattern of behavior that continued after taking office, so Franken ought to be gone, and B. We're chugging right along for the perfect storm of Franken being forced out right as Moore is being elected, and the kneejerk bothsides types being completely undeterred by it.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #61 on: November 20, 2017, 02:15:38 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3638
  • Tommy Points: 283
I think Moore is unfit to be in Congress, so don't take it like I'm defending him.  And yes, there's certainly a spectrum.  But, the allegations against Clinton was a lot more than cheating on his wife.  There were credible allegations of sexual harassment and forcible rape. 

That's something we should all be able to get behind:  if you rape somebody -- adult or child -- you should not be voted into public office.  Policy wise, I think Clinton was a pretty good President, but he victimized a lot of women on his way into office, and once it was known, both parties should have gotten together to fully vet the allegations.  That's not how politics works, though.

Amen (to the unfit for Office remark).

Regarding Clinton, he was in fact investigated, described as follows by Wikipedia:

Quote
Originally dealing with the failed land deal years earlier known as Whitewater, Starr, with the approval of Attorney General of the United States Janet Reno, conducted a wide ranging investigation of alleged abuses including the firing of White House travel agents, the alleged misuse of FBI files, and Clinton's conduct during the sexual harassment lawsuit filed by a former Arkansas government employee, Paula Jones. In the course of the investigation, Linda Tripp provided Starr with taped phone conversations in which Monica Lewinsky, a former White House Intern, discussed having oral sex with Clinton. At the deposition, the judge ordered a precise legal definition of the term "sexual relations"[1] that Clinton claims to have construed to mean only vaginal intercourse. A much-quoted statement from Clinton's grand jury testimony showed him questioning the precise use of the word "is." Clinton said, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the—if he—if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement".[2]

Clinton was also subjected to impeachment hearings, twice, and was acquitted in both cases.  I did not vote for Bill Clinton but like Roy says, his policy while president was actually very good, he reformed welfare, balanced the budget, and came up with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #62 on: November 20, 2017, 04:52:28 PM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8754
  • Tommy Points: 2566
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system? 
« Last Edit: November 20, 2017, 05:07:37 PM by thirstyboots18 »
Yesterday is history.
Tomorrow is a mystery.
Today is a gift...
   That is why it is called the present.
Visit the CelticsBlog Live Game Chat!

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #63 on: November 20, 2017, 06:10:58 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33256
  • Tommy Points: -27964
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?

Well, the judicial system is imperfect. For instance, if a 35 year old pressures a 16 year old into intercourse, that’s not illegal. In many instances, sexual harassment isn’t illegal. In Minnesota, foribly grabbing somebody’s butt through clothing isn’t a sex crime. 

Even if conduct isn’t criminal it can be disqualifying, at least in my mind.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2017, 07:27:30 PM by Roy H. »


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #64 on: November 20, 2017, 06:30:32 PM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8754
  • Tommy Points: 2566
So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?

Well, the judicial system is imperfect. For instance, if a 35 year old pressures a woman into intercourse, that’s not illegal. In many instances, sexual harassment isn’t illegal. In Minnesota, foribly grabbing somebody’s butt through clothing isn’t a sex crime. 

Even if conduct isn’t criminal it can be disqualifying, at least in my mind.
I agree with that, Roy, but it has to be proven through the system.  If has not yet, the voters are the only ones who can judge if it is qualifying...state voters in state races, u.s. citizens in national elections.  Some pretty unsavory characters have been and probably will continue to be elected.  Neither you nor I is the final word on that.
Yesterday is history.
Tomorrow is a mystery.
Today is a gift...
   That is why it is called the present.
Visit the CelticsBlog Live Game Chat!

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #65 on: November 20, 2017, 07:09:31 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11465
  • Tommy Points: 1251
So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?

Well, the judicial system is imperfect. For instance, if a 35 year old pressures a woman into intercourse, that’s not illegal. In many instances, sexual harassment isn’t illegal. In Minnesota, foribly grabbing somebody’s butt through clothing isn’t a sex crime. 

Even if conduct isn’t criminal it can be disqualifying, at least in my mind.
I agree with that, Roy, but it has to be proven through the system.  If has not yet, the voters are the only ones who can judge if it is qualifying...state voters in state races, u.s. citizens in national elections.  Some pretty unsavory characters have been and probably will continue to be elected.  Neither you nor I is the final word on that.

Being judgmental is not something most people proudly aspire to, but I have to say that I do make judgements without always relying on the judicial system for affirmation. 

I thought Bill Clinton was guilty of reprehensible behavior in the White House (before it was undeniable), I think Roy Moore, Harvey Weinstein and Al Franken are guilty as well.  My standard is not "beyond a reasonable doubt" in these cases, it is more like "do I view the accusers as credible".    I don't think I make these judgments lightly -- I watch/listen, read and conclude -- and I try to remain open to new information.  As Roy points out, some things that are bad are not necessarily criminal -- and the court system also blunders at times (e.g., OJ Simpson).   

No doubt in this world of instant "news" and partisan spins we speculate too widely and conclude too quickly ... but sometimes I think it's OK to draw conclusions as a thoughtful observer rather than as judge and jury.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #66 on: November 20, 2017, 07:24:59 PM »

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 553
  • Tommy Points: 75
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #67 on: November 20, 2017, 09:16:28 PM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8754
  • Tommy Points: 2566
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
i don’t know.  Was it wrong for those who believed that Ted Kennedy may have been criminally responsible for Maryjoe Konepke’s drowning death and coverup but voted for him anyway because he was a Democrat and a Kennedy and shared their political view?
Yesterday is history.
Tomorrow is a mystery.
Today is a gift...
   That is why it is called the present.
Visit the CelticsBlog Live Game Chat!

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #68 on: November 20, 2017, 09:24:20 PM »

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 553
  • Tommy Points: 75
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
i don’t know.  Was it wrong for those who believed that Ted Kennedy may have been criminally responsible for Maryjoe Konepke’s drowning death and coverup but voted for him anyway because he was a Democrat and a Kennedy and shared their political view?
First, let me answer your question directly as a a liberal Democrat:  take the "may" out of it and yes indeed it was wrong for people who believed that Ted Kennedy was criminally responsible for Ms. Konepke's death and cover up to vote for him.

Second, why does it seem like so many people on the right cannot reply or answer a question without deflection and whataboutism?
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #69 on: November 20, 2017, 09:26:50 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11465
  • Tommy Points: 1251
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
i don’t know.  Was it wrong for those who believed that Ted Kennedy may have been criminally responsible for Maryjoe Konepke’s drowning death and coverup but voted for him anyway because he was a Democrat and a Kennedy and shared their political view?

If your point is that both are wrong, then I agree with you.  People ignore a lot of very bad behavior from our politicians.  Perhaps this is a wake up call that we shouldn't.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #70 on: November 20, 2017, 09:43:09 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33256
  • Tommy Points: -27964
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
i don’t know.  Was it wrong for those who believed that Ted Kennedy may have been criminally responsible for Maryjoe Konepke’s drowning death and coverup but voted for him anyway because he was a Democrat and a Kennedy and shared their political view?
First, let me answer your question directly as a a liberal Democrat:  take the "may" out of it and yes indeed it was wrong for people who believed that Ted Kennedy was criminally responsible for Ms. Konepke's death and cover up to vote for him.

Second, why does it seem like so many people on the right cannot reply or answer a question without deflection and whataboutism?

Because a lot of the questions aren’t questions, they’re political talking points.  Rather than answer a slanted question, some people prefer to point out hypocrisy and lack of principle (or, in the words of today’s left, “whataboutism”).

It is a 100% fair question / rheotorical device to inquire why somebody is outraged now but was fine with similar behavior previously, when the only thing that changed was the political party of the wrongdoer.

Roy Moore seems like a piece of garbage. However, it is completely valid to respond to criticism of Republicans standing by their candidate by pointing out examples of Dems doing similar things. Neither side has the moral high ground.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #71 on: November 20, 2017, 09:45:05 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11465
  • Tommy Points: 1251
I think Moore is unfit to be in Congress, so don't take it like I'm defending him.  And yes, there's certainly a spectrum.  But, the allegations against Clinton was a lot more than cheating on his wife.  There were credible allegations of sexual harassment and forcible rape. 

That's something we should all be able to get behind:  if you rape somebody -- adult or child -- you should not be voted into public office.  Policy wise, I think Clinton was a pretty good President, but he victimized a lot of women on his way into office, and once it was known, both parties should have gotten together to fully vet the allegations.  That's not how politics works, though.

Amen (to the unfit for Office remark).

Regarding Clinton, he was in fact investigated, described as follows by Wikipedia:

Quote
Originally dealing with the failed land deal years earlier known as Whitewater, Starr, with the approval of Attorney General of the United States Janet Reno, conducted a wide ranging investigation of alleged abuses including the firing of White House travel agents, the alleged misuse of FBI files, and Clinton's conduct during the sexual harassment lawsuit filed by a former Arkansas government employee, Paula Jones. In the course of the investigation, Linda Tripp provided Starr with taped phone conversations in which Monica Lewinsky, a former White House Intern, discussed having oral sex with Clinton. At the deposition, the judge ordered a precise legal definition of the term "sexual relations"[1] that Clinton claims to have construed to mean only vaginal intercourse. A much-quoted statement from Clinton's grand jury testimony showed him questioning the precise use of the word "is." Clinton said, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the—if he—if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement".[2]

Clinton was also subjected to impeachment hearings, twice, and was acquitted in both cases.  I did not vote for Bill Clinton but like Roy says, his policy while president was actually very good, he reformed welfare, balanced the budget, and came up with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".

I guess "Don't Ask" was a move in the right direction at the time, but I hope in retrospect we would all see it as amazing that a person could not be openly gay and be in the US military until 2011 (when "Don't Ask" was finally repealed).

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #72 on: November 20, 2017, 09:46:45 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7510
  • Tommy Points: 767
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
i don’t know.  Was it wrong for those who believed that Ted Kennedy may have been criminally responsible for Maryjoe Konepke’s drowning death and coverup but voted for him anyway because he was a Democrat and a Kennedy and shared their political view?

If your point is that both are wrong, then I agree with you.  People ignore a lot of very bad behavior from our politicians.  Perhaps this is a wake up call that we shouldn't.
dont count on it.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #73 on: November 20, 2017, 10:31:55 PM »

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 553
  • Tommy Points: 75
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
i don’t know.  Was it wrong for those who believed that Ted Kennedy may have been criminally responsible for Maryjoe Konepke’s drowning death and coverup but voted for him anyway because he was a Democrat and a Kennedy and shared their political view?
First, let me answer your question directly as a a liberal Democrat:  take the "may" out of it and yes indeed it was wrong for people who believed that Ted Kennedy was criminally responsible for Ms. Konepke's death and cover up to vote for him.

Second, why does it seem like so many people on the right cannot reply or answer a question without deflection and whataboutism?

Because a lot of the questions aren’t questions, they’re political talking points.  Rather than answer a slanted question, some people prefer to point out hypocrisy and lack of principle (or, in the words of today’s left, “whataboutism”).

It is a 100% fair question / rheotorical device to inquire why somebody is outraged now but was fine with similar behavior previously, when the only thing that changed was the political party of the wrongdoer.

Roy Moore seems like a piece of garbage. However, it is completely valid to respond to criticism of Republicans standing by their candidate by pointing out examples of Dems doing similar things. Neither side has the moral high ground.
It is unconscionable for the Governor to say that she believes Mr. Moore's accusers and is still going to vote for him.  If she were a Democrat it would still be unconscionable.  Avoiding an inconvenient truth due to party affiliation is wrong and weak regardless of the party.  We (both Democrats and Republicans) cannot continue to merely deflect and accept poor behavior by saying "but he/she did...".  If we do we will continue to be represented by people like Moore, Anthony Weiner, Ralph Shortey and Eric Massa.
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #74 on: November 20, 2017, 10:39:23 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33256
  • Tommy Points: -27964
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I am a woman. 
I am also an ex Democrat and an ex. Republican.  My point of view is that he is innocent until proven guilty, and no privileges of citizenship should be taken from him unless and until he is shown to be guilty of something.  His state constituents know him better than an outsider and will decide, through the vote, whether or not he should represent them.  If a case goes against him after the election, consequences will be named at that time.

(I want to add that as a woman I have experienced how most men can be quite low minded at times, usually under the masque of “humor” or “art” .and sometimes misguidedly even thinking of it as “complimentary.”  Those who don’t actually act or speak badly, do not speak against, either.)

So, I guess what I want to say is as long as you are being judgmental, who wants to throw the first stome?  Maybe the time has come when we no longer believe in the judicial system?
Is it judgmental to believe that it is wrong/disgusting/pathetic that the Governor of Alabama says that she believes the women's allegations but she is still going to vote for Moore?
i don’t know.  Was it wrong for those who believed that Ted Kennedy may have been criminally responsible for Maryjoe Konepke’s drowning death and coverup but voted for him anyway because he was a Democrat and a Kennedy and shared their political view?
First, let me answer your question directly as a a liberal Democrat:  take the "may" out of it and yes indeed it was wrong for people who believed that Ted Kennedy was criminally responsible for Ms. Konepke's death and cover up to vote for him.

Second, why does it seem like so many people on the right cannot reply or answer a question without deflection and whataboutism?

Because a lot of the questions aren’t questions, they’re political talking points.  Rather than answer a slanted question, some people prefer to point out hypocrisy and lack of principle (or, in the words of today’s left, “whataboutism”).

It is a 100% fair question / rheotorical device to inquire why somebody is outraged now but was fine with similar behavior previously, when the only thing that changed was the political party of the wrongdoer.

Roy Moore seems like a piece of garbage. However, it is completely valid to respond to criticism of Republicans standing by their candidate by pointing out examples of Dems doing similar things. Neither side has the moral high ground.
It is unconscionable for the Governor to say that she believes Mr. Moore's accusers and is still going to vote for him.  If she were a Democrat it would still be unconscionable.  Avoiding an inconvenient truth due to party affiliation is wrong and weak regardless of the party.  We (both Democrats and Republicans) cannot continue to merely deflect and accept poor behavior by saying "but he/she did...".  If we do we will continue to be represented by people like Moore, Anthony Weiner, Ralph Shortey and Eric Massa.

So why, when somebody points out that BOTH parties have sexual predators, are they accused of “whataboutism”?

I don’t want Moore in office. But, I don’t want Franken in Office, either.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...