Author Topic: Roy Moore  (Read 8916 times)

blink and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #75 on: November 20, 2017, 10:50:49 PM »

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 551
  • 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.

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.
If someone were to point out that both parties have sexual predators that would be absolutely fine and legitimate.  That is not what happened here.  Avoiding an admission that Moore is likely a sexual predator and deflecting to something from 1969 is what makes it 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 #76 on: November 20, 2017, 10:56:23 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33238
  • Tommy Points: -27965
  • 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.
If someone were to point out that both parties have sexual predators that would be absolutely fine and legitimate.  That is not what happened here.  Avoiding an admission that Moore is likely a sexual predator and deflecting to something from 1969 is what makes it whataboutism.

I suppose my objection isn’t with you, but rather how the term was used by others immediately proceeding your post. There’s plenty of room for “whataboutism” on this subject, because plenty of our government officials are dirtbags.


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

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #77 on: November 20, 2017, 11:03:07 PM »

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 551
  • 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.

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.
If someone were to point out that both parties have sexual predators that would be absolutely fine and legitimate.  That is not what happened here.  Avoiding an admission that Moore is likely a sexual predator and deflecting to something from 1969 is what makes it whataboutism.

I suppose my objection isn’t with you, but rather how the term was used by others immediately proceeding your post. There’s plenty of room for “whataboutism” on this subject, because plenty of our government officials are dirtbags.
Unfortunately I have to agree with you on this.  As someone who is a (very small time) elected official and has in recent years become more politically active/aware that is very disheartening.
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 #78 on: November 21, 2017, 03:08:53 AM »

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3850
  • Tommy Points: 397

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #79 on: November 21, 2017, 09:27:49 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17833
  • Tommy Points: 2390
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
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 it allows users to implicitly defend indefensible behavior while still feeling personally above it. If all parties are always equally bad, and everyone is tainted by association with them, then nobody (save the whatabouter) has standing to criticize anything and all things are permissible.

It's also incredibly flexible as a tactic. You can whatabout events that are only trivially equivalent - if people dispute it you've still succeeded in changing the topic, which is a win. You can do it by attaching the behavior of one or a few to vast political categories, same thing. You can do it with events older than the person you're talking to, like here. Even if the behavior is genuinely unprecedented, you can just flat make up an alternate reality where the other side totally did the same thing and supporters will cheerfully whatabout that, like we saw with the obstruction of the last Supreme Court seat.

Basically the more rot a powerful group has, the harder it becomes to defend their actions on their merits, and the more appealing this becomes, enabling more rot. It's not a coincidence the Soviets were notorious for it. And unfortunately I expect it'll get worse before it gets better. Despite being much more prevalent on the right you still see it everywhere, and if both sides ever fully embrace it then nothing's off the table.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #80 on: November 21, 2017, 09:38:12 AM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41491
  • Tommy Points: 2305
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
Quote
Basically the more rot a powerful group has, the harder it becomes to defend their actions on their merits, and the more appealing this becomes, enabling more rot. It's not a coincidence the Soviets were notorious for it. And unfortunately I expect it'll get worse before it gets better. Despite being much more prevalent on the right you still see it everywhere, and if both sides ever fully embrace it then nothing's off the table.


You say this, but what about when Bugs Bunny who was clearly a racist who repeatedly sexually harassed complete strangers he was attracted to, total creep, so sad! What about when he ran for mayor in 1951 against a family first conservative candidate, liberals turned out in droves to vote for him. Where was their precious higher moral ground then?

The whole thing is on this documentary Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton don't want you to see, 'Ballot Box Bunny'. They won't even host it on youtube but you can see it here on DailyMotion.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #81 on: November 21, 2017, 09:53:40 AM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8753
  • Tommy Points: 2565
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.
If someone were to point out that both parties have sexual predators that would be absolutely fine and legitimate.  That is not what happened here.  Avoiding an admission that Moore is likely a sexual predator and deflecting to something from 1969 is what makes it whataboutism.

I suppose my objection isn’t with you, but rather how the term was used by others immediately proceeding your post. There’s plenty of room for “whataboutism” on this subject, because plenty of our government officials are dirtbags.
Unfortunately I have to agree with you on this.  As someone who is a (very small time) elected official and has in recent years become more politically active/aware that is very disheartening.
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 #82 on: November 21, 2017, 10:04:49 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17833
  • Tommy Points: 2390
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
The whole thing is on this documentary Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton don't want you to see, 'Ballot Box Bunny'. They won't even host it on youtube but you can see it here on DailyMotion.

Please don't leak the final report of Trump's voter fraud commission, they worked really hard on it  ;)


More on topic, here's a real quote from an actual Alabama pastor named Earl Wise:

“How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line. Plus there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.”

Don't you just hate it when you set out to drop some truth bombs about how high school girls just love fantasizing over 35 year old men that look like Roy Moore and accidentally let it slip that you're totally into 14-year-olds too?

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #83 on: November 21, 2017, 10:23:58 AM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41491
  • Tommy Points: 2305
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
More on topic, here's a real quote from an actual Alabama pastor named Earl Wise:

“How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line. Plus there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.”

Don't you just hate it when you set out to drop some truth bombs about how high school girls just love fantasizing over 35 year old men that look like Roy Moore and accidentally let it slip that you're totally into 14-year-olds too?

WOW. Just man. Alabama sucks. Roll Tide. Roll tide detergent everywhere. Gross.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #84 on: November 21, 2017, 10:40:02 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18110
  • Tommy Points: 8814

TP.  laughed so hard my coffee almost came out my nose!

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #85 on: November 21, 2017, 10:45:56 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18110
  • Tommy Points: 8814
More on topic, here's a real quote from an actual Alabama pastor named Earl Wise:

“How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line. Plus there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.”

Don't you just hate it when you set out to drop some truth bombs about how high school girls just love fantasizing over 35 year old men that look like Roy Moore and accidentally let it slip that you're totally into 14-year-olds too?

WOW. Just man. Alabama sucks. Roll Tide. Roll tide detergent everywhere. Gross.
it's mind-boggling some of the people news outlets have gotten quotes from in Alabama concerning this issue.  I can't fathom how there's grown adults in this country that excuse Moore's behavior by any excuse they deem personally acceptable.

wonder if Earl's allowed within 500 feet of a school after that comment?  smh

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #86 on: November 21, 2017, 11:25:22 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33238
  • Tommy Points: -27965
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
More on topic, here's a real quote from an actual Alabama pastor named Earl Wise:

“How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line. Plus there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.”

Don't you just hate it when you set out to drop some truth bombs about how high school girls just love fantasizing over 35 year old men that look like Roy Moore and accidentally let it slip that you're totally into 14-year-olds too?

WOW. Just man. Alabama sucks. Roll Tide. Roll tide detergent everywhere. Gross.
it's mind-boggling some of the people news outlets have gotten quotes from in Alabama concerning this issue.  I can't fathom how there's grown adults in this country that excuse Moore's behavior by any excuse they deem personally acceptable.

wonder if Earl's allowed within 500 feet of a school after that comment?  smh

I agree.

But, Bill Clinton is an actual, violent rapist. His wife actively helped suppress that story, as well as the stories of other women Clinton harassed and abused.

Didn't most Democrats excuse that behavior by any excuse they deem personally acceptable?  I mean, this is Gloria Freakin’ Steinem saying that even if all the accusations from Paula Jones and Katherine Willey were true, it’s no big deal:

http://www2.edc.org/WomensEquity/edequity98/0561.html

Bob Packwood, Clarence Thomas, John Conyers, Al Franken, Mark Foley, and many others.  For way too long, both Washington and Hollywood have been a boys will be boys, power and control culture. Offenders belong in prison, not in office.


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

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #87 on: November 21, 2017, 12:04:25 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17833
  • Tommy Points: 2390
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
More on topic, here's a real quote from an actual Alabama pastor named Earl Wise:

“How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line. Plus there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.”

Don't you just hate it when you set out to drop some truth bombs about how high school girls just love fantasizing over 35 year old men that look like Roy Moore and accidentally let it slip that you're totally into 14-year-olds too?

WOW. Just man. Alabama sucks. Roll Tide. Roll tide detergent everywhere. Gross.

I mean I kinda agree but I think it's a mistake to assume this is an Alabama problem as opposed to a "gross dudes justifying drooling over underage girls while also blaming them for it" problem.

Much like racial animosity this kind of attitude is still present everywhere, we've just papered over it by stigmatizing saying it aloud. We're seeing that stigma getting peeled away in a lot of areas and who's really onboard with it is steadily becoming clearer.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #88 on: November 21, 2017, 12:11:45 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18110
  • Tommy Points: 8814
More on topic, here's a real quote from an actual Alabama pastor named Earl Wise:

“How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line. Plus there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.”

Don't you just hate it when you set out to drop some truth bombs about how high school girls just love fantasizing over 35 year old men that look like Roy Moore and accidentally let it slip that you're totally into 14-year-olds too?

WOW. Just man. Alabama sucks. Roll Tide. Roll tide detergent everywhere. Gross.
it's mind-boggling some of the people news outlets have gotten quotes from in Alabama concerning this issue.  I can't fathom how there's grown adults in this country that excuse Moore's behavior by any excuse they deem personally acceptable.

wonder if Earl's allowed within 500 feet of a school after that comment?  smh

I agree.

But, Bill Clinton is an actual, violent rapist. His wife actively helped suppress that story, as well as the stories of other women Clinton harassed and abused.

Didn't most Democrats excuse that behavior by any excuse they deem personally acceptable?  I mean, this is Gloria Freakin’ Steinem saying that even if all the accusations from Paula Jones and Katherine Willey were true, it’s no big deal:

http://www2.edc.org/WomensEquity/edequity98/0561.html

Bob Packwood, Clarence Thomas, John Conyers, Al Franken, Mark Foley, and many others.  For way too long, both Washington and Hollywood have been a boys will be boys, power and control culture. Offenders belong in prison, not in office.
there were certainly those who excused Clinton's behavior back then.  I wasn't one of them. 

completely agree that those in power who commit these acts should be removed from power or kept out of office when/if the allegations against them are proven --> doesn't even have to be a court of law for criminal charges but a preponderance of evidence showing moral/ethical issues that would lead to either removal from office or preclusion for running (or at the very least, voters having enough self-respect and common decency not to vote for these people).

I noticed that you left Trump off the list -- someone by his own words has committed acts worse than some of those you listed.  you've gone on record as voting for him to get your pet cause supported while ignoring all the sexual harassment/predatory behavior he was known to commit.  how is that different? 

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #89 on: November 21, 2017, 12:18:56 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33238
  • Tommy Points: -27965
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
More on topic, here's a real quote from an actual Alabama pastor named Earl Wise:

“How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line. Plus there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.”

Don't you just hate it when you set out to drop some truth bombs about how high school girls just love fantasizing over 35 year old men that look like Roy Moore and accidentally let it slip that you're totally into 14-year-olds too?

WOW. Just man. Alabama sucks. Roll Tide. Roll tide detergent everywhere. Gross.
it's mind-boggling some of the people news outlets have gotten quotes from in Alabama concerning this issue.  I can't fathom how there's grown adults in this country that excuse Moore's behavior by any excuse they deem personally acceptable.

wonder if Earl's allowed within 500 feet of a school after that comment?  smh

I agree.

But, Bill Clinton is an actual, violent rapist. His wife actively helped suppress that story, as well as the stories of other women Clinton harassed and abused.

Didn't most Democrats excuse that behavior by any excuse they deem personally acceptable?  I mean, this is Gloria Freakin’ Steinem saying that even if all the accusations from Paula Jones and Katherine Willey were true, it’s no big deal:

http://www2.edc.org/WomensEquity/edequity98/0561.html

Bob Packwood, Clarence Thomas, John Conyers, Al Franken, Mark Foley, and many others.  For way too long, both Washington and Hollywood have been a boys will be boys, power and control culture. Offenders belong in prison, not in office.
there were certainly those who excused Clinton's behavior back then.  I wasn't one of them. 

completely agree that those in power who commit these acts should be removed from power or kept out of office when/if the allegations against them are proven --> doesn't even have to be a court of law for criminal charges but a preponderance of evidence showing moral/ethical issues that would lead to either removal from office or preclusion for running (or at the very least, voters having enough self-respect and common decency not to vote for these people).

I noticed that you left Trump off the list -- someone by his own words has committed acts worse than some of those you listed.  you've gone on record as voting for him to get your pet cause supported while ignoring all the sexual harassment/predatory behavior he was known to commit.  how is that different?

Lesser of two evils. I thought he was the worst candidate in the GOP field, but he made it through.  If Hillary wasn’t a corrupt monster with no soul, I might not have voted for Trump.  Also, for better or for worse, you can’t trust anything said about Trump, including stuff out of his own mouth. Unlike the others, some of the allegations against Trump have been coordinated and demonstrably untrue.


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