Will Alabamians "stand for decency," or will they put an alleged child molester in the U.S. Senate? Because for today's Goopers, an alleged child molester is far better to them than a decent Democrat.
That's how sick the current GOP is:
"[The editorial] also criticized Alabama's Republican establishment, most of which has stood behind and defended Moore despite the rising number of accusations against him.
The state's Republican apparatus stands in contrast to the Republican National Committee, which pulled its financial support on Monday. Many Republican lawmakers in Congress have called for Moore to step down and for voters to cast their ballots for a write-in candidate.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has disavowed Moore and suggested that Alabamians vote instead for Jeff Sessions, who is currently serving as attorney general. Sessions enjoyed immense popularity in the state before he joined President Donald Trump's administration.
In addition to calling Alabama's upcoming special election a turning point for women "in a state that has silenced them for too long," the editorial also said it was a referendum on whether "we will accept this kind of behavior from our leaders."
***********************
Never forget, this is the party of "family and religious values" until those values are put to the test, then it is the party of political expediency, even for an alleged child molester.
Never let them forget their shame.
AND THIS!
You can't make this stuff up:
Alabama Evangelicals take a stand for child molesters: 'Some 14-year-olds ... could pass for 20'
“I don’t know how much these women are getting paid, but I can only believe they’re getting a healthy sum,” said pastor Earl Wise, a Moore supporter from Millbrook, Ala.
Wise said he would support Moore even if the allegations were true and the candidate was proved to have sexually molested teenage girls and women."
The moral rot of the current GOP.
17 comments:
“Kellyanne Conway on Fox News this morning said the White House wants a Child Molester in the Senate just to pass their deceptive Tax Bill.
That's their idea of "Making America Great."
They're in the sewer with the Pu$$y Grabber-in-Chief. Never thought I'd see a major political party get this dirty.
When asked if people should vote for Moore, Conway even surprised the FOX News crew with this quote...
"I'm telling you that we want the votes in the Senate to get this tax bill through."
Conway I think made a mistake by say aloud the truth behind the GOP platform... win at all costs, even if it means seating a person who sought underage girls. And the Governor there essentially said the same thing when she said she believes the accusers but even someone like Moore is better than a Dem who fought the KKK.
Someone I know well said to me today The earth is going through a period of cleansing unlike any other time in history. It is literally vomiting up the worst in humankind as it prepares for the transition from a fear based existence/reality to a love based.
She might be right.
For decades, both the media and political class protected former President Clinton and his wife from questions such as these. Times have truly changed.
Lawmakers like Sen. Gillibrand (NY-D) are saying former President Bill Clinton should have resigned after the Lewinsky scandal.
Dave, RN,;
The only good thing about the collapse of ethics in the GOP is that they're not hiding the truth about the sort of moral degenerates they've become.
RN is correct when he describes it as "vomiting up the worst in humankind."
To Telling Like it is.
Bill Clinton was impeached and has a permanent stain on his presidency. How was he protected from his rotten behavior?
If you agree Clinton should have resigned, you should also encourage investigations into the allegations of 16 women who claim Donald Trump has raped and molested them. You can't have it both ways.
Or are you one of those hypocrites who believes all the women who accused Clinton but none of the women who are accusing Donald Trump, a self-identified sexual assaulter?
Shaw... everyday brings another round of accusations, some years old, against public figures across all political stripes.
Roy Moore, Trump, Franken, Weinstein, Clinton [again... new revelations] and now Charlie Moore.
I have no idea what we are supposed to make of all of it. Odds are they cannot all be true, or false. How are we to adjudicate and consider all of these?
It seems that after many years in power, men are now paying the price for abusing and taking advantage of women during those years.
I think you meant Charlie Rose.
I just had this conversation with my sister. What needs to happen is what happens with any misdemeanor or felony. The law has to determine the degree of the violation. Is it with a child? Is it forced? Is it like the Franken accusations, stupid antics that happened in front of a camera and in public as opposed to where the Roy Moore accusations occured? They're not all equal in violating the victims.
The one thread that runs through this is that powerful, famous men felt they could get away with anything they wanted to do to girls and women. And that has to end.
Yes... Rose.
The Lewinsky "scandal" involved a consensual relationship with an adult, even if she was considerably younger than Clinton. The accusations against Roy Mo[lest]ore involve coercive behavior (the Nelson case would probably qualify as attempted rape), and in at least one case the victim was a legal minor. They're not comparable. One accusation against Trump involved rape of a 13-year-old. Again, far more serious.
To find a Democrat facing comparable accusations, you'd have to go to Weinstein, and nobody is defending him, much less suggesting he's fit to be elected to anything.
The newspaper editorial has it right. Alabama and its voters are being weighed in the balance here.
Rational: I can't say that a perusal of the news from around the world these days suggests to me that a "love-based existence" is imminent. As for powerful men exploiting their power to commit sexual abuse, my impression is that for most of history it was even more common than it is today. What's different today is that victims are more likely to speak out, the media are more likely to report on such cases, and society is more likely to hold abusers to account -- compared with, say, 1950 (never mind 1950 BC).
Re Trump being self-identified sexual assaulter, there is more than just the Access Hollywood tape. In a 2006 appearance on Howard Stern, Trump replies "true" when Robin Quivers calls him a sexual predator. Video here.
Infidel...
Historically I would simply add this regarding the Clinton/Lewinsky relationship. Feminists and employee law has argued for years that there can be no such thing as a consensual relationship between a boss and an employee due to the power dynamics of the situation. It is, they've argued, not possible to give consent, as an equal, to someone who is your boss. If the "consensual" relationship took place in the workplace, then by the definition of workplace harassment many stood on before this happened, it was not consensual.
Please don't read any support of Moore into this.
We're frequently asking about the shoe on the other foot. Do you think the Dems would have defended a GOP Presidents right to this type of behavior in the Oval Office? I doubt it. We'd would have called it workplace harassment, plain and simple. Because it was.
Dave: Feminists and employee law has argued for years that there can be no such thing as a consensual relationship between a boss and an employee due to the power dynamics of the situation. It is, they've argued, not possible to give consent, as an equal, to someone who is your boss.
I'm aware of this argument, but it's wrong. It's perfectly possible for relationships in that situation to be fully consensual. This isn't the place to go into details, but I'm speaking from personal experience.
Almost all human sexual relationships involve some imbalance of power. That doesn't mean they aren't consensual. We should be focusing on genuinely abusive and coercive behavior -- of the kind of which recent events have furnished so many examples -- not redefining terms to cast the net impossibly wide and lose focus on the real problem.
Sexual abuse and harassment is probably as old as humanity. For that matter, there are some analogous behaviors among chimpanzees. That's no reason for inaction, though. The rise of civilization has included teaching humans the self-discipline to refrain from behavior that isn't compatible with civilized social groups. As we've seen, the process still has some way to go.
I actually think the present barrage of scandals in the media will have a salutary effect. Millions of men who unthinkingly regard these kinds of behavior as trivial entertainment are seeing that it can actually mean a career-ending scandal or at least massive social disgrace. That will probably be more effective at changing their behavior than most other available options.
The exception, of course, is men in those religious-fundamentalist or hard-right subcultures where they see almost everyone standing by the abuser and crudely denouncing the accusers -- persisting in the patterns of decades or centuries ago. But this will just make those subcultures look even more primitive and repugnant to mainstream society. It may not be obvious now, but I think the Evangelical world is going to pay a real price for coddling and excusing people like Moore and Trump.
I copied and pasted the above comment to the 11/21 post, per Infide753's request.
I'm also leaving it here because it is relevant to this post as well.
Infidel... Let me say I don't necessarily disagree with you on the ability of someone to enter into a consensual relationship even if they are in an employer/employee situation.
However, that was not the mantra of feminist leaders back then. We can disagree with the rightness or wrongness of that belief, but it was accepted at the time before Clinton had his affair.
For a slice of time, back in the 90's, that view held sway. It's not unreasonable to question why, that being true, those same people that pushed that narrative, mostly progressives, abandoned their view when one of their boosters, WJC, got caught doing what they, up to that point, had decried.
Now... was it all a lot of BS, at least legally? Yes, I believe so, especially from Gingrich who was having his own affair at that time.
I did feel then, and still believe, that WJC embarrassed the office of the President. And until the day I die, I will be thankful for the way President Obama honored that same office. We need more like him, and not even one more like the current occupant.
Infidel... you said "I think the Evangelical world is going to pay a real price for coddling and excusing people like Moore and Trump."
Sadly, as someone trying to live like Jesus, I have to agree with you. And for that, I am heartbroken. The 80% and whatever part of that who is supporting Roy Moore have done more damage to the church than, in my opinion, they will ever know.
My work, even bringing clean water to disenfranchised people in Mexico, has been made much harder because of church support of Trump. Young people will not even consider a life like mine because of this election. It is that simple. I speak to young people, of all stripes, almost daily and the disgust they now harbor towards the church, is incredible.
And sad...
Post a Comment