It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Breitbart Editor Cites Ringo Starr Song to Defend Roy Moore

page: 1
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+14 more 
posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 04:07 AM
link   
And just in, in the you can't make this ## up, Breitbart p̶r̶o̶p̶a̶g̶a̶n̶d̶i̶s̶t̶ senior editor Joe Pollak used the lyrics of a Ringo Starr song to justify Moore's sexual misconduct allegations

www.huffingtonpost.com.au...


In what may be the most ludicrous defense to date of Roy Moore, the Republican Senate nominee who is accused of child sexual harassment, a senior Breitbart News editor cited a Ringo Starr song.

Joel Pollak, senior editor-at-large of Breitbart, cited Starr’s “You’re Sixteen (You’re Beautiful and You’re Mine)” — a cover of a 1960 Johnny Burnette song written by the Sherman Brothers — as he sought to defend Moore’s alleged behavior in an interview with CNN’s Chris Cuomo on Monday.


Could this be the most retarded defence ever? Let's look at the words of Pollak.


“You know, in 1973, Ringo Starr hit No. 1 on the Billboard charts with the song [‘You’re Sixteen’]” Pollak told Cuomo. “It was a remake of an earlier song. He was 30-something at the time, singing about a 16-year-old. You want to take away Ringo Starr’s achievement?”



Even better, let's watch a video of this moron.



When challenged this is the response Pollak gave.


Rather than say whether or not he believes his own nonsense, Pollak pivoted to say that as a parent he also fears the “risks our sons face today,” which is that they “are going to be exposed to accusations that may or may not be true.” While parents have always had to worry about their daughters, Pollak pleaded with Cuomo to think about the sons.


Whatever that means.
edit on 28-11-2017 by bgerbger because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: bgerbger

So, let me get this straight...

This...gutter scum, used lyrics from a seventies cover of a fifties song, to justify behaviour now?

Well, fine. In that case, in the spirit of 1944, someone can feel free to slot this ignorant piece of filth with a Lee Enfield. After all, that is what folk used to do to far right lunatics back in the day.
edit on 28-11-2017 by TrueBrit because: (no reason given)


ETA:
Sorry, I forgot the audience I was dealing with. For the peanut gallery, I would like to clarify that I am not suggesting that shooting this man is a wise move, nor a morally acceptable one.

What I am doing here, is juxtaposing something I consider equally stupid, with the comments mentioned in the OP, to illustrate why they are stupid.

To the OP, its getting silly now, is it not? The level to which some will sink, to try to legitimise the behaviour of awful people is becoming ever more baffling.
edit on 28-11-2017 by TrueBrit because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: bgerbger

This is pretty funny, but I still think that the politician from Alabama who used the Bible to defend Moore took the taco. I give this a close second though. It's amazing how far up their own asses conservatives are reaching to defend this bozo. Is partisanism SO important to them that they will discard all virtues and morals they hold?



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 06:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: bgerbger
ETA:
Sorry, I forgot the audience I was dealing with. For the peanut gallery, I would like to clarify that I am not suggesting that shooting this man is a wise move, nor a morally acceptable one.

What I am doing here, is juxtaposing something I consider equally stupid, with the comments mentioned in the OP, to illustrate why they are stupid.

I seriously find it sad you have to pre-explain your point to the thread because someone WILL come in and twist your words to suggest you were serious there. It really is a sad reflection on how far we've let public discourse standards sink. Any sort of argument with even a smidgen of nuance has to be carefully explained, lest some hack grab at it and twist your words all over the internet so that no defense will satisfy it.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Way to insult your audience of ATS murders, your always good for a laugh. It must be difficult being the coolest hipster in the room.......a reply to: TrueBrit




posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: bgerbger
ETA:
Sorry, I forgot the audience I was dealing with. For the peanut gallery, I would like to clarify that I am not suggesting that shooting this man is a wise move, nor a morally acceptable one.

What I am doing here, is juxtaposing something I consider equally stupid, with the comments mentioned in the OP, to illustrate why they are stupid.

I seriously find it sad you have to pre-explain your point to the thread because someone WILL come in and twist your words to suggest you were serious there. It really is a sad reflection on how far we've let public discourse standards sink. Any sort of argument with even a smidgen of nuance has to be carefully explained, lest some hack grab at it and twist your words all over the internet so that no defense will satisfy it.


If you ask me, its all going according to the plan.
Welcome to the world of newspeak.
Its slowly taking hold and pretty soon you will only be able to communicate with those who are close enough to you to understand who you are without qualification.

Sad.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:42 AM
link   
What should have been said was:

Have you or anyone at CNN practiced any journalism with this case? Have you had a expert look at the two different color ink, to see if their were written by two different people? Have you found any paper trail, or only hear-say and opinions?
IF you are only going to have opinions on a new show, have you had any people that really knows anyone involved in the accusations, because accusations are really all we have here. There are no photos, or a paper trail, like tax payer funded settlements. Speaking of tax payer funded settlements, how are you and the other journalist doing in figuring out which members of congress used tax payer money to settle sexual misconduct. This isn't news, all you are doing is dividing people, and people, who normally are smart people, will parrot your lead and start this same crap all over the internet.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: SocratesJohnson

What on Earth are you talking about?



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Does anyone else find it funny that all through the gay marriage debate the Right claimed that it would be the Left that tries to normalize pedophilia?



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I have a bayonet to one of those Enfields, I’d say he would rather be shot than worked over by one of those. Even the scabbard is a nasty piece of work capable of a very serious beat down.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Tulpa

It can't be an inevitable path. If we stand up and demand standards again then things can change.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Don't you threaten me with your violent hate speech.

How dare you!!!




posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Well.....Thank goodness he didnt start singing.......

"Well she was just 17, and you know what I mean"....The Beatles I saw her standing there 1962.

OR........

Was a Hot afternoon, on the last day of June, and the Sun was a Demon......

She as 31, I was 17..............................!!! Bobby Goldsboro "Summer" 1973.

OR a 1000 other songs....Like....

16 candles...........

Teen Angel, Teen Angel...wo wo wo wo, I Love you so uho,

Sweet Little Sixteen.......you know what I mean.....

etc etc



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 10:47 AM
link   
For all the talk about liberals and gays being pedophiles over much less evidence, it sure is a shame that so many conservatives aren't able to put their money where their mouth is when it comes to Roy Moore.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bgerbger

This is pretty funny, but I still think that the politician from Alabama who used the Bible to defend Moore took the taco. I give this a close second though. It's amazing how far up their own asses conservatives are reaching to defend this bozo. Is partisanism SO important to them that they will discard all virtues and morals they hold?



You're telling me!!

Crazy how someone could defend a person who has been PROVEN guilty by settling and paying off their victims...

SICKENING!!



I'm still waiting for the Moore trail and or settlement to his victims to imply his guilt. If and when that happens I say the same as every guilty criminal....STRING HIM UP!!

Now as far as Conyers is concerned are you still OK with him serving even knowing he IS guilty??


edit on 28-11-2017 by GuidedKill because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-11-2017 by GuidedKill because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Tulpa

It can't be an inevitable path. If we stand up and demand standards again then things can change.


Does that mean we throw away due process?? Does that mean Mr. Moore is not entitled to his?

You want change??

Let's start with looking in our own back yards....



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: GuidedKill

Deflecting a negative thread about a Republican to talk about a Democrat? SAY IT AINT SO! Can't have ATS talking negative about you guy's heroes. The Republicans.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Tulpa

It can't be an inevitable path. If we stand up and demand standards again then things can change.


Does that mean we throw away due process?? Does that mean Mr. Moore is not entitled to his?

You want change??

Let's start with looking in our own back yards....

1) That post had NOTHING to do with what you were talking about and was more meta commentary on discussion etiquette. So that tells me you aren't even paying attention to what I'm saying.

2) I never suggested he was guilty.

3) I damn well am not arguing to discard due process.

4) Don't put words in my mouth. ESPECIALLY when you don't even understand what you are replying to in the first place.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
What should have been said was:

Have you or anyone at CNN practiced any journalism with this case? Have you had a expert look at the two different color ink, to see if their were written by two different people? Have you found any paper trail, or only hear-say and opinions?
IF you are only going to have opinions on a new show, have you had any people that really knows anyone involved in the accusations, because accusations are really all we have here. There are no photos, or a paper trail, like tax payer funded settlements. Speaking of tax payer funded settlements, how are you and the other journalist doing in figuring out which members of congress used tax payer money to settle sexual misconduct. This isn't news, all you are doing is dividing people, and people, who normally are smart people, will parrot your lead and start this same crap all over the internet.


Sounds like we have a winner.

Listen, Moore is a turd. No doubt. But until its a bit more than innuendo (much of it dating back decades), im less interested in him and more intersted in why the slush fund isn't being largely reported?

We have evidence, real evidence, of crimes, real crimes, taking place. And instead media gives us 24x7 innuendo.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

Deflecting a negative thread about a Republican to talk about a Democrat? SAY IT AINT SO! Can't have ATS talking negative about you guy's heroes. The Republicans.


When you complain about partisan politics and say we need change. Then I show you someone playing partisan politics the exact same thing you say you hate and you call it a deflections?!?!

LMAO so I guess you're not really concerned in making any changes unless it deals with the political party you disagree with....got it!

I thought I was commenting/replying to your original comment about partisan politics. Guess not.




top topics



 
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join