Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
IheartIheartTesla

US politics: Alabama Jones and the Temple of Moore

407 posts in this topic

23 hours ago, Mudguard said:

 Even Moore's own denials, have been pretty weak.  For example, he hasn't denied dating high school girls aged 16-18 while he was a 30 something year old district attorney.  While not necessarily illegal per se, I find it at a minimum to be hugely problematic that a 30 plus year old district attorney, a person of authority, would be constantly pursuing relationships with high school girls that are legally considered minors.

Uh yeah, even if Moore didn’t break the law, his sliming around the high schools and the local mall is like getting into major creepersterville territory.

Making it worse of course is allegedly he is supposed to be good old lord fearin' man. The hypocrisy here is off the chart.

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

This goes into the 'what is more reasonable to believe' part.

Is it more reasonable to believe that a small time senator candidate was outed with his practice of dating and molesting young girls because a national newspaper started investigating and actually pursuing long-time rumors about him, and then used investigative practices to determine things? Which continues to have more and more sources and corroborating data come out after the story has run, and has the Senator fabricating things to exculpate himself?

OR

Is it more reasonable to believe that Roy Moore is entirely innocent, and that this is a smear campaign waged by the Democrats, the national media AND the establishment Republicans?

Doesn't the Right have some capable gumshoes that cut their teeth on the Comet Pizza investigation that could get to the bottom of this??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Week said:

Doesn't the Right have some capable gumshoes that cut their teeth on the Comet Pizza investigation that could get to the bottom of this??

In all seriousness, Mike Cernovich (of Pizzagate bullshit fame) is actually heading down to Alabama to stir shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Altherion said:

No, I would not. However, this is because I disagree with several of his positions rather than because of the propaganda.

 I can't do it. I really shouldn't do it. I'm not gonna do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I can't do it. I really shouldn't do it. I'm not gonna do it.

DO IT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now there are apparently robocalls in Alabama purporting to be from a WaPo reporter named "Bernie Bernstein" offering $5,000-7,000 (or is it 5,000-7,000$?) for women in their mid-fifties to mid-sixties to provide "dirt" on Moore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mudguard said:

You may not have the resources to personally determine whether the allegations against Moore are true or false, but plenty of other organizations do, and I think it's safe to assume that many different people and organizations are fact checking the Washington Post story.

And ordinarily this would provide an extra perspective... but McConnell being on the same side as the Democrats means that it is almost certainly is not the case. It's not a secret that most of the media is controlled by a relatively small group of people and when they're all on one side, the people who might have been able to present a counterpoint generally don't have the resources to do it either (especially not on short notice).

1 hour ago, Mudguard said:

Even Moore's own denials, have been pretty weak.  For example, he hasn't denied dating high school girls aged 16-18 while he was a 30 something year old district attorney.  While not necessarily illegal per se, I find it at a minimum to be hugely problematic that a 30 plus year old district attorney, a person of authority, would be constantly pursuing relationships with high school girls that are legally considered minors.  There's overwhelming evidence that he's done this.  Are you saying that you don't find this behavior truly objectionable?  Would you vote for a politician that admitted to this behavior if you agreed with his positions on policy issues?  Or are you saying that you think there's only about a 25% chance that this allegation is true?  If you think that this behavior is objection but it only has a 25% chance of being true, how did you come up with that number when there's tons of evidence that the allegations is true and no (that I'm aware of) evidence that it's false?

The 25% is for something that is actually illegal. I also personally find the behavior described in your second sentence distasteful, but you have to remember that "Ethically questionable, but not illegal!" might as well be the unofficial motto of modern US politics. Is dating on the order of 10 women who are clearly too young 40 years ago worse than voting for policies which directly and logically lead to the loss of their livelihoods for hundreds of thousands or sometimes even millions of Americans? Of course, ideally I would prefer a candidate who does not have drawbacks of this nature, but given current Congressional reality, yes, I'd take one with that kind of behavior over the usual slime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

So now there are apparently robocalls in Alabama purporting to be from a WaPo reporter named "Bernie Bernstein" offering $5,000-7,000 (or is it 5,000-7,000$?) for women in their mid-fifties to mid-sixties to provide "dirt" on Moore.

So this is where Greg Marmalard ended up after he got out of prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 

GHW Bush was gracious in that clip and took Carvey's jokes in stride. Just can't see 45 in situation like that.  The next early morning twitter rage would be something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone here watch the Session's questioning by Congress today? Holy Shit! Does Congress have any sort of aparatus or means of holding this guy in contempt? Or labeling him a hostile witness or something? This guy is pathetic. Just rambling on endlessly without answering a question directly, burning the various questioners time before they can get to anything substantive, it's just fucking crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Altherion said:

And ordinarily this would provide an extra perspective... but McConnell being on the same side as the Democrats means that it is almost certainly is not the case. It's not a secret that most of the media is controlled by a relatively small group of people and when they're all on one side, the people who might have been able to present a counterpoint generally don't have the resources to do it either (especially not on short notice).

The 25% is for something that is actually illegal. I also personally find the behavior described in your second sentence distasteful, but you have to remember that "Ethically questionable, but not illegal!" might as well be the unofficial motto of modern US politics. Is dating on the order of 10 women who are clearly too young 40 years ago worse than voting for policies which directly and logically lead to the loss of their livelihoods for hundreds of thousands or sometimes even millions of Americans? Of course, ideally I would prefer a candidate who does not have drawbacks of this nature, but given current Congressional reality, yes, I'd take one with that kind of behavior over the usual slime.

I don't buy the conspiracy theory that both the liberal and conservative mass market media are out to destroy Moore and function simply as tools of a small group of people that don't like him.  While owners of these companies certainly have influence, they don't have complete editorial control and can't restrict all the reporters and editors from doing their jobs.  It would come out if the owners were trying to squash fact checking of this big of a story.  Regardless, Breitbart has the resources and has sent reporters out to debunk the claims.  I doubt they'll find anything of significance.  McConnell and other Republicans are with Democrats because the evidence is overwhelming.  You can see how almost all of them initially qualified their statements with the phrase "if true", but many have now dropped the phrase now that they've had time to review the evidence.

Even if the 25% number was for doing something illegal, I think that's too low if you accept that Moore actively dated and pursued relationships with highschool girls while he was a 30 something district attorney.  At least a couple of the women have accused him of sexual assault, which includes things like unwanted groping.  Given that he was acting in a predatory manner to begin with, I think the allegations that he groped some of them without permission are credible.  No one has presented a credible explanation for why these women would be lying.  I don't see why you would believe Moore's denials over the accusations by these women.  At worst, it should be a 50% chance that Moore did something illegal.

Personally, I would have an extremely hard time voting for someone I found morally repugnant, but I suppose it would depend on how repugnant I found the act.  If I thought a Democrat sexually assaulted women, I can't see myself voting for that person based on economic policy arguments or other policy positions of that nature.  It would have to be something extraordinarily bad in their opponent for me to consider voting for the sexual predator.  I'd have to be somehow convinced that their opponent was going to be the next Hitler, or something else on that level of horrendousness.  A tax plan or job creation plan isn't going to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

It would have to be something extraordinarily bad in their opponent for me to consider voting for the sexual predator.  I'd have to be somehow convinced that their opponent was going to be the next Hitler, or something else on that level of horrendousness.  A tax plan or job creation plan isn't going to do it.

That’s entirely reasonable and the way I’d approach the issue but we have to keep in mind that hard right media is absolutely bonkers and Jones is a Democrat.  That (D) will be considered something extraordinarily bad to a lot of conservative voters because being a Democrat isn’t about policy quibbles it’s about wanting open borders, taking your guns, lacking patriotism, ushering in socialism, being anti-Christian, pro baby killer, and sacrificing American sovereignty to the NWO.  

That’s the way this is framed in Bannonland.  It won’t be guy who had inappropriate contact with underage girls vs. a guy who happens to be a Democrat, it’s guy whose been accused of liking young women (probably by liberal plants) vs. candidate who will go along with the destruction of America.  

Obviously this scandal really hurts Moore’s chances, but I’m not gonna let myself be taken by surprise if Alabama voters pull a collective “hold my beer” and elect Moore anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Altherion said:

Unless you believe that unprovable allegations regarding events that happened 40 years ago somehow coincidentally turned up in a national newspaper weeks before the election, there can be little doubt that there is a propaganda campaign against Moore. However, I guess what you're really asking is whether I believe that the allegations are true -- after all, propaganda can be perfectly truthful -- and the answer to that is more nuanced. On the one hand, whoever is running these attacks did a very good job: this is a far cry from, for example, the half-baked, anonymous accusations against Trump in the fall of 2016. Of course, they can't prove anything, but they've done about as well as possible in the given situation and their case is fairly persuasive.

On the other hand, however... there are two strong factors against them. The first is simply the timing and I've already mentioned it above. The second is the sheer number of scumbags lined up on the side of this propaganda. They usually take opposite sides on an issue so one has to choose between them, but in this case, the Democrats and mainstream Republicans are on the same sides and if that coalition claimed that the sky is blue, I would be tempted to go outside and double check just to make sure that it hasn't mysteriously changed color. I do not have the resources to determine whether the allegations are true or false, but, on the balance between all of these things, I would guess there is about a 25% chance that Moore did something truly objectionable.

No, I would not. However, this is because I disagree with several of his positions rather than because of the propaganda.

Thanks.  I actually was not really intending to ask if you believe the allegations are true, or at least that was only a small part of my ask.  I was mainly intending to ask 2 things:

1.  Do you believe Moore is "plucky underdog" with basically evil Dem/"mainstream" Rep empires hell bent on stopping him with overwhelming PR force.  Based on your answer, I think the answer to this is yes you do believe that.  I on the other hand believe that any evangelical social ultra-conservative who speaks out against people who are non-white/non-christian can never be considered an underdog when he is in Alabama.  Now move him to my hometown of San Francisco and he'd be so much of an underdog that people would actually not get it and applaud him as a comedy act.  Separately, I believe it is far less clear that this is some giant masterminded PR campaign.  Many powerful or at least well-known people have suddenly had credible accusers from long past come forward.  It's a bit of a wave.  And of course Moore had prior unsavory allegations/statements from cops already - they just weren't as blatant as this.

2.  I was also asking whether you support Moore in totality, and it sounds like the answer is no because of his positions (edited to add:  on the issues!).  On that at least, if on little else, I'm happy to say we agree.

In any case, thanks again for your answers.  That helps.

Edited by Wethers
positions... on the issues you sickos! And I say that as a sicko.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Does Congress have any sort of aparatus or means of holding this guy in contempt? Or labeling him a hostile witness or something?

Sure - contempt of Congress.  Don't hold your breath on any forthcoming citation though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Anyone here watch the Session's questioning by Congress today? Holy Shit! Does Congress have any sort of aparatus or means of holding this guy in contempt? Or labeling him a hostile witness or something? This guy is pathetic. Just rambling on endlessly without answering a question directly, burning the various questioners time before they can get to anything substantive, it's just fucking crazy.

Such actions would require Republicans to have morality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Altherion said:

And ordinarily this would provide an extra perspective... but McConnell being on the same side as the Democrats means that it is almost certainly is not the case.

So you're saying that because McConnell believes the allegation, he's part of the anti-Moore campaign. Basically, your position is that anyone who is not supporting Moore is conspiring against him. You've gone full-on Conspiracy Theory 101, tinfoil hat and all, on no more solid basis than generic distrust of 'the establishment'. No attempt to assess the evidence, just an axiomatic 'anyone on this side is a liar, by virtue of being on that side'.

Do you expect anyone to take that seriously? It would be laughable if it wasn't for the nature of the allegations. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of good news - Democrats flipped another House seat last night, this time in an Oklahoma district that went +40 for Trump. They won it by 34 (!) votes, which means a recount that probably won't change the result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should be obvious to any open-minded person that the accusations against Moore are true. We are not in a court of law, and only two questions matter here: do the accusations fit Moore's proven behavior pattern (they do), and was he caught lying or contradicting himself (he was). Here is a good article on the topic: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/11/the_mountain_of_evidence_against_roy_moore.html

Also, I am confident that Jones will win the election. Special elections are all about turnout. There are no other elections on that day, no other ballot questions, the whole election is about Moore vs Jones. Republican voters have to force themselves to leave house on election day, go to the polling station, and cast their vote for a pedophile, and all this for what? Control over 1/100 of the US Senate? Some Senate vote on a random future issue which may come to a 50/50 split?

The only way Moore can win is if his supporters somehow manage to paint Jones as some scary demon who must be kept out of office at all costs (the Clinton strategy), but I don't see how that is possible. From what I've read of him, Jones is a personally religious, non-offensive moderate whose main issues are health care, civil rights and raising the minimum wage, and who mostly stays quiet about abortions and guns (two hot-button issues capable of mobilizing the Republican turnout).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Altherion went full "better a child molester than a Democrat or establishment Republican"

Edited by Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0