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.

 

Top problematic Democrat Rep out of the picture

page: 6
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Krazysh0t


I've seen quite a bit of coverage for all three, to be honest. And this thread shows that Conyers is "not in need of counseling". They, the Dems, want him out.

Now, they do, yes. however, when the allegations first started coming in, the story was different. Franken is still safe in his position so far as I can see.

Just in this morning.
Franken faces pressure to quit as Democrats demand ‘zero tolerance’ for sexual misconduct


These same people, like Pelosi, who took a week or two to decide Conyers needed to go were screaming for Moore's head before his first accuser finished her press conference.

Well of COURSE there is partisanism at work here. I'm not going to sit here and say that everyone is acting purely out of the goodness of their hearts. It's politics. You know, Latin for "many parasites"?



You out yourself.

That comparison is only valid if all accusations are assumed 100% truthful. It is a ridiculously easy exercise in simplicity itself to prove that is a false assumption. Every single day, in almost every court in the country, likely across the globe, witnesses are discredited and cases are thrown out because of dishonesty.

It is also quite simple to show that your blanket assumption of truthfulness has some strict limits: you are on record here as outing many a politician, usually Republicans, as liars... sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't, but you do seem to call them on their honesty.

Thus, your blanket assumption of honesty is actually a conditional assumption of honesty toward those who accuse others of things you wish were true. As in, you wish Roy Moore were a child molester. Where Franken and Conyers are concerned, the evidence has mounted against them to the point it is difficult to defend them, but not against Moore. Moore's accusers have only their word.

This directly contradicts your earlier statement asking for fairness and equity over these allegations. Worse, it can be translated as "if someone is guilty, they can apologize and get off, but someone who is innocent must be severely punished for not apologizing for something they are innocent of." That is NOT fairness and equity.

I won't call you a liar, sir... but I believe you may do so to yourself.

TheRedneck

You seem to be putting an AWFUL lot of words in my mouth. I never said that I want Moore to be guilty. I was merely postulating on the way the two partisan sides act when accused, but at LEAST you didn't outright call me a liar. Right?




posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Well it's more along the lines that we are redefining morality on the fly and then holding people accountable for actions they took place years ago. That's why I see it as a witch hunt. Every day there is a new person outed for misconduct from an age where that misconduct was the norm. Granted I DO agree with the changing morality. I don't think that was acceptable behavior, and we should definitely punish these people going forward, but it's hard to fault someone now who didn't know any better who was just going along with the flow at the time.

As such, I feel like this isn't about empowering women anymore and more about empowering the political party you stand for. "How many liberals can you we topple with sex allegations?" "How many conservatives can we topple with sex allegations?" It makes it easy to fight them when you don't have to address their policy positions.

Sorry. That's just how I feel about the situation.



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 07:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: MRuss
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh, so Bill O'Reilly and his former boss... they're just what?


Ok. I'll give you those two. I forgot about them.



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

And Matt Lauer's wife accused him of "cruel and inhumane behavior" back during their divorce proceedings. Only to walk back those claims when an arrangement was reached. Turns out Matt Lauer actually was guilty of being a deviant. Who's to say the same doesn't go for Trump?



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Exactly why Ex Post Facto laws are illegal.

However the court of public opinion doesn’t recognize such laws and is more akin to a drumhead or kangaroo court. Since the 24/7 news cycle requires spectacular stories to remain relevant, the Gotcha Story is slowly surpassing the If it Bleeds, it Leads Story. Sadly Identity Politics fills in that demand all too nicely.

Don Henley hit the nail on the head with Dirty Laundry.



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t


Just in this morning.

Exactly. What, 2 weeks after the allegations broke?


Well of COURSE there is partisanism at work here. I'm not going to sit here and say that everyone is acting purely out of the goodness of their hearts. It's politics. You know, Latin for "many parasites"?

Good! We have agreement! I'm glad you can admit that.


You seem to be putting an AWFUL lot of words in my mouth. I never said that I want Moore to be guilty.

I'm not putting anything in your mouth that wasn't already there... just pointing out the inconsistencies. As a matter of fact, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, that you don't believe in the tactics use by the Holy Roman Inquisition (guilty but absolved if they confessed, guilty and punished if not). Someone with less faith in humanity (were that possible) might accuse you of such a paradigm.

But that means you base your opinions on the assumption of absolute honesty from those you do not know, and yet your history has shown a tendency to do the opposite. Thus, you are looking at this point in political history subjectively and not objectively. Thus, you obviously desire a specific outcome that your subjective analysis promotes, ergo, Roy Moore being a pedophile.

No specific admission is needed. Your actions spell out the truth very well.


...at LEAST you didn't outright call me a liar. Right?

Of course not. You did that.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Well if you want to call me a liar just because you want to read into my words then we have nothing left to discuss.



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t


Well it's more along the lines that we are redefining morality on the fly and then holding people accountable for actions they took place years ago. That's why I see it as a witch hunt. Every day there is a new person outed for misconduct from an age where that misconduct was the norm. Granted I DO agree with the changing morality. I don't think that was acceptable behavior, and we should definitely punish these people going forward, but it's hard to fault someone now who didn't know any better who was just going along with the flow at the time.

As such, I feel like this isn't about empowering women anymore and more about empowering the political party you stand for. "How many liberals can you we topple with sex allegations?" "How many conservatives can we topple with sex allegations?" It makes it easy to fight them when you don't have to address their policy positions.

Sorry. That's just how I feel about the situation.

There is little in this post that I can disagree with. The allegations from years ago, which are obviously past the statute of limitations, are meaningless except for cheap political witchhunts (although I believe the statute of limitations is too short sometimes). I firmly believe any proven act of aggression sexually toward a woman is heinous and should be treated as such. I believe there is no place whatsoever for political partisanship in legal matters (and the very act of injecting such should be severely punished). And I too believe this is a witchhunt.

But as a witchhunt, which witch began the hunt? This is a tactic that I have watched escalate over the past two decades. It started with women attempting to use sexual harassment as a tool to control men... escalated to women trying to extract revenge and/or financial gain from men... progressed to a preferred accusation toward politicians... and now it is being manipulated by those in political power using financial payment for some accusations instead of relying on bonafide rumor.

And it began with the left. The difference now is both sides are using the same weapon. If the weapon of sexual allegations is to be used, I have no issue with it being used equally. My issue is that it is being used at all. I am against nuclear war, too... but I would consider it silly if we suddenly destroyed all of our nukes while allowing North Korea to improve theirs.

No, the trigger has been pulled. I only hope it is released soon.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Again, I am calling you nothing. I am analyzing your posts.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Whatever you want to call it.



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Lets be honest....anyone on Capital Hill calling out anyone else for sexual impropriety is a hypocrite. They had to have known (and absolutely should have known) about the "slush fund" used to pay off people with tax payer dollars.

Whether what Moore is accused of happened or not aside, the shock and disgust shown by Democrats over him is ridiculously hypocritical and proves that they are willing to lie to utilize propaganda. The same can be said for any Republicans on Capital Hill acting horrified over Conyers.

The only way any of them avoid the blame is for them to release it all. We need to know how distributions from the fund were handled, approved, tracked, etc. We need to know who all utilized a fund distribution, and for what purpose. All NDA's need to be lifted as they seem to be contracts that violate the law.

If anyone can defend any of them....SPIT.



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


Lets be honest....anyone on Capital Hill calling out anyone else for sexual impropriety is a hypocrite.

I don't know if "anyone" is exactly accurate, but perhaps you are familiar with the mathematical theory of limits? As in, we might not be able to actually achieve 100%, but we can get to 99.999999999999999999999999% and even beyond.


Whether what Moore is accused of happened or not aside, the shock and disgust shown by Democrats over him is ridiculously hypocritical and proves that they are willing to lie to utilize propaganda. The same can be said for any Republicans on Capital Hill acting horrified over Conyers.

Absolutely. I once felt the accusations against the Democrats were motivated to an extent by the accusations against Moore, but considering the fact that the Republican party seems to have not loosened its opinion of Moore, I am having second thoughts about that theory.

I suppose it is my extreme amount of distrust for any of the Swamp Critters in DC, regardless of what color they are painted, that drives my cynicism on these issues. My tenets in these matters are simple: no man is above the law, sexual mistreatment of women is abhorrent, and all are innocent until proven guilty. There is a corollary to that last tenet: everyone is considered innocent, even in the arena of public opinion, until enough evidence surfaces to indicate a likelihood of guilt.

And I will admit, when I see others violating those tenets... which I firmly believe are reasonable and rational... it causes me to doubt their sincerity and integrity. That loss of faith in reason is why I switched back from CNN to Fox as my primary news source, and why I abandoned NBC even for local news.

Which, coupled with the fact that Fox itself is far from a shining example of unbiased journalism, leaves me in the unenviable position of having to judge issues based on my knowledge of human behavior... not exactly a settled science to be sure.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t


I feel like this isn't about empowering women anymore and more about empowering the political party you stand for. "How many liberals can you we topple with sex allegations?" "How many conservatives can we topple with sex allegations?" It makes it easy to fight them when you don't have to address their policy positions.


Actually, I agree with this 100%. It *has* turned into a partisan effort, and I welcome any effort to bring more fair and balanced analysis into the fold. Simple accusations should never be enough to ruin someone's career/life. Clearly if evidence of a crime is submitted, that is entirely different.

But you're right in that it is being used by the parties for their advantage. It may have started with the Dems, but the Repubs are now fully involved in the practice as well. Believe it or not, this belief is the source of most of the satire/sarcasm I put out here on ATS. It is my hope that others will see just how many witch hunts we have going on right now, which admittedly transcend party lines entirely.


edit on 12/1/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join