Roy Moore / Al Franken

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

It wasn’t the same issue for liberals, last year, as it is today. The difference? The pervert in the Oval Office is a republican, so now all of a sudden, mistreating women is bad. If Hilary had won, your side would still be ignoring this. As with most things, liberal outrage on this issue is very selective, which means it’s fake.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it wasn't the same issue for anyone liberal or conservative... But Trump , Harvey Weinstein, bill o'reilly ,roger ailes, Rupert Murdoch. got caught with their pants down now its everyone's issue

and your stuck on Bill Clinton

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

it wasn't the same issue for anyone liberal or conservative... But Trump , Harvey Weinstein, bill o'reilly ,roger ailes, Rupert Murdoch. got caught with their pants down now its everyone's issue

and your stuck on Bill Clinton

curious choice of characters there given the field...Clinton actually had his pants down...when did Trump have his pants down?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

it wasn't the same issue for anyone liberal or conservative... But Trump , Harvey Weinstein, bill o'reilly ,roger ailes, Rupert Murdoch. got caught with their pants down now its everyone's issue

and your stuck on Bill Clinton

No, I am focusing on Hilary now. She lied to protect bill, and she slut shamed his victims on national tv. And the people who supported her and her husband, lecture me about voting for trump. Spare me the fake moral outrage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, I am focusing on Hilary now. She lied to protect bill, and she slut shamed his victims on national tv. And the people who supported her and her husband, lecture me about voting for trump. Spare me the fake moral outrage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He won't understand your point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

He won't understand your point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He has no point. He is obsessed with the Clintons ( a wife defending her husband and that sprites you) a
He refuses to live in the present . Or accept the reality of who's involved in this current round of bad behavior .. he sees accusers of republicans as conspiracy. But accusers of democratics are truthfull and rightous and prove liberalism is the cause. power is the cause of sexual harassment and assault not party but that's lost on john

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

He has no point. He is obsessed with the Clintons ( a wife defending her husband and that sprites you) a
He refuses to live in the present . Or accept the reality of who's involved in this current round of bad behavior .. he sees accusers of republicans as conspiracy. But accusers of democratics are truthfull and rightous and prove liberalism is the cause. power is the cause of sexual harassment and assault not party but that's lost on john

So, is Roy Moore doing his bad sex stuff in the present? Is Trump doing his bad sex stuff in the present?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

So, is Roy Moore doing his bad sex stuff in the present? Is Trump doing his bad sex stuff in the present?

who said anything about their behavior being current this isn't the argument. but please keep trying to defend them


(peoples displeasure with such displays of bad behavior that occurred in past are affecting the present ..

definition of present : existing or occurring now.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by detbuch

So, is Roy Moore doing his bad sex stuff in the present? Is Trump doing his bad sex stuff in the present?

Originally Posted by wdmso

who said anything about their behavior being current this isn't the argument. but please keep trying to defend them


(peoples displeasure with such displays of bad behavior that occurred in past are affecting the present ..

definition of present : existing or occurring now.

Your the one who said:

"He [Jim in CT] has no point. He is obsessed with the Clintons ( a wife defending her husband and that sprites you) a
He refuses to live in the present . Or accept the reality of who's involved in this current round of bad behavior .. "

The "current round of bad behavior" is not current. The behavior is not current. There is no current round of Moore's or Trump's sexual behavior. It is old behavior which is being accused now. Hillary's and Bill's bad behavior did not stop them from being Party leaders. Neither did JFK's or Ted Kennedy's. And if, as you say here "peoples displeasure with such displays of bad behavior that occurred in past are affecting the present ..", how does Bill Clinton's proven sexual predation in the past not affect the present? Aren't some of the women he "assaulted" in the past still suffering from not getting "justice"? And so why do you say that pointing out Clinton's sexual behavior in the past is not affecting the present? That it's not, as you say, living "in the present"?

The Dems NOW saying that the Clinton's or the Kennedy's discretions were wrong and that they should have been convicted of something is too convenient (no political damage to the Dems in calling out the Clinton's and Kennedy's NOW instead of then when it counted), and, as Jim said, unbelievable.

And it is an obvious ploy to make it sound reasonable, even necessary, that we should do something, make some conviction or resignation happen, for Moore's or Trump's past supposed bad behavior.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

definition of present : existing or occurring now.

or something you give/get at Christmas

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

He has no point. He is obsessed with the Clintons ( a wife defending her husband and that sprites you) a
He refuses to live in the present . Or accept the reality of who's involved in this current round of bad behavior .. he sees accusers of republicans as conspiracy. But accusers of democratics are truthfull and rightous and prove liberalism is the cause. power is the cause of sexual harassment and assault not party but that's lost on john

You might want to take a course in reading comprehension.

I can’t live in the present? How’s this? Presently, you are still bending over backwards to protect Hilary. Presently, I am saying that Trump is a morally bankrupt reptile who should be investigated and dealt with.

You are the one who gives a free pass to scumbags in their own party, not me.

Try. Making. That. Wrong.

Am I going too fast for you?

And it’s ok to slut shame your husbands victims? ‘Standing up for your spouse’ is what you do if your spouse gets sick. Bill was not a victim who needed an advocate, he is a serial predator of women.

Snack on that for a bit.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

He won't understand your point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obviously you were right
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, I am focusing on Hilary now. She lied to protect bill, and she slut shamed his victims on national tv. And the people who supported her and her husband, lecture me about voting for trump. Spare me the fake moral outrage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...iously-attack/

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by spence

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...iously-attack/

please dont bring facts into this are you crazy!!!

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

it wasn't the same issue for anyone liberal or conservative... But Trump , Harvey Weinstein, bill o'reilly ,roger ailes, Rupert Murdoch. got caught with their pants down now its everyone's issue

and your stuck on Bill Clinton

I am only surprised it was this quick to get to DJT. I figured they would wait a couple weeks.

For the record, never sexually assaulted or worse anyone. Don't condone it and don't vote (knowingly) for people proven to have. We as a nation need to be real careful about this because people will use this as leverage against legit and innocent people (difficult for me to use politicians as innocent in the same context.

The technology on the near horizon will allow bad guys to impersonate people both audibly and visually blurring reality from technology and the most honest people will be under pressure from this

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by JohnR

I am only surprised it was this quick to get to DJT. I figured they would wait a couple weeks.

For the record, never sexually assaulted or worse anyone. Don't condone it and don't vote (knowingly) for people proven to have. We as a nation need to be real careful about this because people will use this as leverage against legit and innocent people (difficult for me to use politicians as innocent in the same context.

The technology on the near horizon will allow bad guys to impersonate people both audibly and visually blurring reality from technology and the most honest people will be under pressure from this

Your last point highlights one of the most dangerous challenge we all have moving forward, technology allows anyone anywhere to put on the internet whatever message they want; the Russians have known that for years. Now that it might not be as free as it once was, who knows how that is going to factor in, unless the law suits being brought forward are effective in reversing that.