The GOP's continuing support of Moore in Alabama

Paul M. Weir

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
7,833
Likes
1,813
Points
163
Location
Dublin
#41
I don't pretend to see the future, but not being in the club means you can't vote in the club and won't get the benefits of being a club member. It's that simple. As for other 'clubs', why would other nations fully trust or believe the US after recent zig-zagging and reversing course. My guess is that while other nations will accept some change in direction, say in response to trade deficits, a hardening or softening of tariffs for example, arbitrary complete changes in direction are another matter.

Why go to the effort of negotiating a deal when it looks very likely to be thrashed the next election? The looser is other nations trust in the stability of the US in terms of policy. On the road you should change lanes carefully and turn at junctions or off ramps, the world sees the US weaving in and out of traffic and driving on the wrong side of the divider like a drunk. It's not the change, it's the erratic nature of how the changes are made that generate distrust.
 

Sparafucil3

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
17,037
Likes
1,264
Points
163
Location
USA
#43
I don't pretend to see the future, but not being in the club means you can't vote in the club and won't get the benefits of being a club member. It's that simple.
Lots of people get invited into the club by members without having to pay all those dues. If your popular, or rich, or have something to offer they want, you get invites all the time. And America is nothing, if not a very popular and very lucrative market. People will want to talk with us as well. Why should we give up our own sovereignty in a collective bargaining agreement? Why should we let the other gang up on us cutting this deal? We should get the best deal we can for us, not for all of us. I have little doubt that we won't be approached. We have too much to offer to ignore. -- jim
 

Sparafucil3

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
17,037
Likes
1,264
Points
163
Location
USA
#44
It's not the change, it's the erratic nature of how the changes are made that generate distrust.
You won't be too distant to call on us when the chips are down. That need never changes, nor has the answer. The rest is all just posturing and urinary Olympics. -- jim
 

MrP

Smile,you won didn't you?
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
5,694
Likes
375
Points
83
Location
Woof? Bark? Whine?
#45
I don't believe the deal will be able to be sweetened to Donalds liking, no matter how much anyone else gives away. From what I've read, unless the deal is one that comes from and is proposed by him, he'll not come to the TPP table. That's not diplomacy, that's tantrums.
What do you offer to sweeten the deal then? -- jim
 

MrP

Smile,you won didn't you?
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
5,694
Likes
375
Points
83
Location
Woof? Bark? Whine?
#46
A little overblown there Jim? ;) Everyone ganging up on you and making you give up your sovereignty?

It'll be business as usual with the US IMO...whether or not better deals for America could be had through the TPP is now off the table though, unless Donald tries to individually negotiate. Has he successfully managed to do any of that yet with anyone? Serious question, I remember much posturing with Mexico but don't follow it closely enough....
Why should we give up our own sovereignty in a collective bargaining agreement? Why should we let the other gang up on us cutting this deal? We should get the best deal we can for us, not for all of us. I have little doubt that we won't be approached. We have too much to offer to ignore. -- jim
 

Sparafucil3

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
17,037
Likes
1,264
Points
163
Location
USA
#47
It'll be business as usual with the US IMO...whether or not better deals for America could be had through the TPP is now off the table though, unless Donald tries to individually negotiate. Has he successfully managed to do any of that yet with anyone? Serious question, I remember much posturing with Mexico but don't follow it closely enough....
I am not going to support Trump, I despise the man. But this whole notion that America should be concerned because someone is losing faith in us is WAY over-blown. We survived Carter. We survive Nixon. This will be just a blip on the tape. -- jim
 

Sparafucil3

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
17,037
Likes
1,264
Points
163
Location
USA
#48
I don't believe the deal will be able to be sweetened to Donalds liking, no matter how much anyone else gives away. From what I've read, unless the deal is one that comes from and is proposed by him, he'll not come to the TPP table. That's not diplomacy, that's tantrums.
If he doesn't get a deal he likes, why make it? All the complaining here and the whinging about "American reliability" and "Faith in America". Sounds like the tantrums are elsewhere, not here. -- jim
 

MrP

Smile,you won didn't you?
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
5,694
Likes
375
Points
83
Location
Woof? Bark? Whine?
#49
I think he could get a deal that is good for America and still not take it, because it's not *his* deal.
If he doesn't get a deal he likes, why make it? All the complaining here and the whinging about "American reliability" and "Faith in America". Sounds like the tantrums are elsewhere, not here. -- jim
 

MAS01

Active Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
3,372
Likes
308
Points
83
Location
Joplin, MO
#50
This isn't some Breitbart news story, I am sure WaPo was very careful.

I think the Democrats are better than this, they wouldn't excuse this. There have been statements by Alabama GOP leaders they are going to vote for him anyway.

Pot, meet Kettle.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...hired-underage-hookers-feds-article-1.2336046

I won't hold my breath waiting for you to call for Menendez's resignation.

(Note that the story is two years old).

The small difference between the parties that I have seen is that the Republicans are calling out Moore, telling him to withdraw and pulling support. Haven't seen the Democrats ever do that, only rally behind the accused (Weiner may be the exception, but I can't remember if he was still in Congress at the time). See William Jefferson Clinton as an example.
 
Last edited:

Morbii

Supreme Misanthropist
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
6,198
Likes
428
Points
83
Location
Gilroy, CA
#51
Strange, earlier it seemed someone was defending him based on hebephilia being legal in Alabama.

I also don’t understand what Clinton has to do with it. There’s a mountainous difference between consensual affairs (even if immoral) and sexual assault.
 

Sparafucil3

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
17,037
Likes
1,264
Points
163
Location
USA
#52
I think he could get a deal that is good for America and still not take it, because it's not *his* deal.
Maybe. All politicians are narcissistic, arrogant asshats. This one perhaps more so. What surprises you about that? -- jim
 

MAS01

Active Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
3,372
Likes
308
Points
83
Location
Joplin, MO
#53
Strange, earlier it seemed someone was defending him based on hebephilia being legal in Alabama.

I also don’t understand what Clinton has to do with it. There’s a mountainous difference between consensual affairs (even if immoral) and sexual assault.


Unfortunately, hebephilia doesn’t enter into the equation. I have brought up the question of what was the age of consent in Alabama in 1979. It is currently 16; it may have been lower in the past.

Well, I’ll tell you what Bill Clinton has to do with it. Yes, he had a consensual affair with Monica Lewinsky. While creepy, since she wasn’t much older than his daughter, perfectly legal. What got Bill in trouble with Monica was lying about it under oath. Al Capone didn’t go to jail for murder and mob related activities, he went to jail for the lesser crime of tax evasion. Similarly, if Bill had simply admitted that he had had an affair, the whole mess would have drifted away. Hell, he could have said “yeah, I banged the hell out of her on top of the Resolute Desk” and in a month or so everyone would have forgotten about it.

But I wasn’t referencing Monica, or Gennifer Flowers for that matter. Let’s talk about Paula Jones, you know, the woman Bill paid $850,000 to in order for her to drop her sexual harassment lawsuit. Let’s talk about Kathleen Willey, who claimed that Bill groped her in the Oval Office. Let’s talk about Juanita Broaddrick, who claimed Bill raped her in 1978. But there all merely allegations, right? Never proven, right? Wasn’t it Hillary who said in 2015 that “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed and supported”? Please explain to me the difference between the allegations against Bill and those against Judge Moore (other than age).

And what about the lack of outrage from the Democrat party at the allegations against Sen. Menendez? Isn’t what’s good for the goose, good for the gander? Or does Democrat outrage only count against Republicans? At least national Republicans are calling on Moore to withdraw. Which Democrat has called on Menendez to resign?

Neither you nor I have a say in what the people of Alabama must ultimately decide. At this point, Judge Moore’s name cannot be taken off the ballot. Either he will be elected or he will not. If he wins, does he then take the oath and resign, allowing the Governor to name his replacement? Who knows.
 

Marty Ward

Active Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
10,832
Likes
262
Points
83
Location
Maryland
#54
Strange, earlier it seemed someone was defending him based on hebephilia being legal in Alabama.

I also don’t understand what Clinton has to do with it. There’s a mountainous difference between consensual affairs (even if immoral) and sexual assault.
Perhaps you should talk to Juanita Broderick then. Or is rape less serious than molestation in your view?
 

Morbii

Supreme Misanthropist
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
6,198
Likes
428
Points
83
Location
Gilroy, CA
#55
Of course hebephilia enters the equation, as it was literally your defense.

Clinton’s probably a bad guy. So, where’s your outrage with the president you knowingly voted for (after the fact) who has his own accusers and has made his own payouts?
 

Morbii

Supreme Misanthropist
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
6,198
Likes
428
Points
83
Location
Gilroy, CA
#56
Perhaps you should talk to Juanita Broderick then. Or is rape less serious than molestation in your view?
Honestly, I didn’t even know Clinton had accusers. Doesn’t keep the above from being strictly narrative and totally ignoring the problems in the home team (excuses and “but he...” vs “he’s an animal”), either way. I’m happy to admit he’s a slime ball too, just like Roy and our current president and seemingly half of Hollywood.

But, to answer your question, I think child molestation, at least in some circumstances, is more serious than rape, yes. Though I think in both cases it deserves a shot to the head.
 

MAS01

Active Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
3,372
Likes
308
Points
83
Location
Joplin, MO
#57
Of course hebephilia enters the equation, as it was literally your defense.

Clinton’s probably a bad guy. So, where’s your outrage with the president you knowingly voted for (after the fact) who has his own accusers and has made his own payouts?

Here is exactly what I wrote in another thread:

"As an aside, knowing parts of the Deep South as I do, I'm not sure that the age of consent in Alabama in 1979 wasn't 14. I believe it is only 16 now."

Please explain to me how this constitutes a "defense". If, and I repeat, if, the age of consent was 14, and she consented, then guess what? It's legal. Creepy, but legal.

Based on your comment, then, sure, "Trump's probably a bad guy." Does that make you feel better? As to not knowing that Clinton had accusers, were you asleep through the entirety of the 1990s? You mean to tell us that you heard nothing, absolutely nothing, about these women's accusations that were in every media outlet? Come on man, you can make up a better excuse than that.
 

Morbii

Supreme Misanthropist
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
6,198
Likes
428
Points
83
Location
Gilroy, CA
#58
Here is exactly what I wrote in another thread:

"As an aside, knowing parts of the Deep South as I do, I'm not sure that the age of consent in Alabama in 1979 wasn't 14. I believe it is only 16 now."

Please explain to me how this constitutes a "defense". If, and I repeat, if, the age of consent was 14, and she consented, then guess what? It's legal. Creepy, but legal.
If someone is accused of something vile, brushing it aside by pointing out that it’s legal IS AN EXCUSE. In fact, your EXCUSE was so poor that you weren’t even sure you were accurate!

Based on your comment, then, sure, "Trump's probably a bad guy." Does that make you feel better?
Then perhaps you should drop the Clinton schtick, since you’re guilty of the same exact thing, only after the accusations have come out.

As to not knowing that Clinton had accusers, were you asleep through the entirety of the 1990s? You mean to tell us that you heard nothing, absolutely nothing, about these women's accusations that were in every media outlet? Come on man, you can make up a better excuse than that.
I was in high school in the 90s (graduated in 97). I wasn’t paying much attention to the news - and my parents were anti-Clinton to top it off, so if there’s bias in me it could easily lean that direction. Clinton for me is Lewinsky, and basically always has been. Though, I have heard of Paula before in relation to Clinton since and am a little annoyed I forgot if I did know at one time.
 

MAS01

Active Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
3,372
Likes
308
Points
83
Location
Joplin, MO
#59
If someone is accused of something vile, brushing it aside by pointing out that it’s legal IS AN EXCUSE. In fact, your EXCUSE was so poor that you weren’t even sure you were accurate!
So, now an accusation means that a person is guilty? It doesn't matter how vile, how creepy, how immoral it may be (that's for society to condemn or condone), but it does matter if it was legal or not. Do you suggest we jail people who do vile, yet legal, things? And no, I didn't look up what the age of consent was. If you reread what I wrote, it wasn't a statement of fact, only a question of what the law was at the time.

Then perhaps you should drop the Clinton schtick, since you’re guilty of the same exact thing, only after the accusations have come out.
Mentioning Clinton is merely to point out the hypocrisy of the Democrat Party.

You should read the following:

https://www.theatlantic.com/enterta...ckoning-with-bill-clintons-sex-crimes/545729/

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

Neither The Atlantic nor The New York Times is a very conservative organization. I just love when Gloria Steinem makes the point of forgiving Clinton because he is so important to reproductive freedom.


I was in high school in the 90s (graduated in 97). I wasn’t paying much attention to the news - and my parents were anti-Clinton to top it off, so if there’s bias in me it could easily lean that direction. Clinton for me is Lewinsky, and basically always has been. Though, I have heard of Paula before in relation to Clinton since and am a little annoyed I forgot if I did know at one time.
Were you not paying attention last year when all of this bubbled back to the surface again, along with Hillary's job to trash the reputations of Bill's accusers in order to keep the "bimbo eruptions" under control? Hell, Trump even brought Bill's accusers to one of the debates. Did you not see the look on Bill's face?

You seem to be more concerned with the Moore accusations due to the victim's age, rather than the act itself. How is it worse if the victim of a sexual assault is a 14-year-old girl rather than a 50-year-old woman?
 

MAS01

Active Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
3,372
Likes
308
Points
83
Location
Joplin, MO
#60
From Roy Moore's Wikipedia page:

Moore soon moved to the district attorney's office, working as the first full-time prosecutor in Etowah County. During his tenure there, Moore was investigated by the state bar for "suspect conduct" after convening a grand jury to examine what he perceived to have been funding shortages in the sheriff's office. Several weeks after the state bar investigation was dismissed as unfounded, Moore quit his prosecuting position to run as a Democrat for the county's circuit-court judge seat in 1982. The election was bitter, with Moore alleging that cases were being delayed in exchange for payoffs. The allegations were never substantiated, and Moore overwhelmingly lost the Democratic runoff primary to fellow attorney Donald Stewart, whom Moore described as "an honorable man for whom I have much respect, and he eventually became a close friend." A second bar complaint against Moore followed, which was dismissed as unfounded. Moore left Gadsden shortly thereafter to live for a year in Australia.

Moore returned to Gadsden again in 1985. He ran in 1986 for Etowah County's district attorney position against fellow Democrat Jimmy Hedgspeth. He lost that election as well, and Moore returned to private practice in the city. In 1985, he married his wife Kayla (born c. 1961). In the early 1990s, Moore switched his affiliation to the GOP and added a wooden Ten Commandments plaque to his courtroom.
I wonder, if Judge Moore hadn't switched parties, if this would have been such a big deal. Just sayin' . . . . . . . .