International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   USA Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Senator Al Franken Kissed and Groped Me Without My Consent, And Thereís Nothing Funny (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=324808)

NoahFence 16th November 2017 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Big Dog (Post 12079576)
So far the liberals taking care of it consist of blatant slut shaming and whataboutism.

So. ....

stop lying.
He's being raked over the coals in CNN and by democratic senators.

Sorry. You don't get to claim double standards.
Stop. Lying.

Belz... 16th November 2017 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by applecorped (Post 12079499)
Just use the sliding scale of sexual assault works every time:thumbsup:

I'm just trying to understand his argument. There seems to be a contradiction in there but maybe I'm misunderstanding.

theprestige 16th November 2017 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoahFence (Post 12079526)
FYI....

Coservatives need to shut the **** up about sexual assault and let liberals take care of this. You people lost that right when you voted trump in.

Haha oh wow. "Let the liberals take care of this"? Like you took care of Bill Clinton? Like you took care of all the liberal money men in Hollywood who've been getting a free pass for decades?

As much as anything else, Trump's election is a reaction years of hypocrisy and shrill preaching from the left. You lost the option of keeping yourself above it all a long time ago.

Travis 16th November 2017 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079570)
Agreed, but we are talking not about criminal charges but about fitness for Public Office. I think what Franken did was bad enough so that he should no longer serve in the US Senate. You can do thing that are not illegal but are bad enough so your career as an elected official should be over.
And there is also it would make the Dems look like total hypocrites when they go after Moore.
ANyway, Franken is going to be tossed under the bus by the Democrats.one way or the other.

Franken probably will step down. Quite likely this will happen sooner rather than later.

I'm still not on board with the idea that they are equally bad actions. They are both bad things to do but one kiss with a grown woman is just, in my opinion, not equal to or worse than locking a child in your car and going grab hands on her.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoahFence (Post 12079583)
stop lying.
He's being raked over the coals in CNN and by democratic senators.

Sorry. You don't get to claim double standards.
Stop. Lying.

I was referring to this thread. You know where people post her pictures and her history as a model and waitress to assert that with that history she has had much worse...

You know classic slut shaming.

Because we all know that her history has absolutely nothing at all to justify the senators actions.

Nothing. Classic victim blaming. Really contemptible arguments.

Beelzebuddy 16th November 2017 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079547)
And this is about as good an example of "What Aboutism" as I have seen.

What, really? Did you not read my earlier post where I nearly literally said "hey what about this secret Congressional hush money fund?"

I you think Franken's deeds disqualify him from public office, that's fine, but I don't think it would cost a million dollars a year in sexual harassment lawsuit settlements. Yet someone is spending that much. I want to know who they are, and question whether they should be in public office, not least of which because they clearly feel entitled to the use of taxpayer funds to sweep their misdeeds under the rug.

Oystein 16th November 2017 05:40 PM

Wow I am glad I have been pretty consistent in the Moore-thread on three points that I feel are relevant there:

1. That the accusations against Moore aren't terrible - he didn't rape, the 14-yo victim was certainly illegal, but neither a child nor raped in the common (not legal) sense - i.e. a scale needs to be applied
2. That the incidents with teenagers 16+ were, by themselves, totally legal and only marginally a problem ethics-wise; they mainly serve to corroborate the plausibility that Moore hit on teenagers in his early 30s
3. That the big problem NOW is not the past incident but his denial of the same, him calling the victim a liar.

And so, I can consistently offer an appraisal of the Franken incident:
1. It was wrong, but not terrible. He didn't rape anybody, and she wasn't even a teenager. Still wrong. And on a scale. Less wrong that Moore actually fondling a 14-yo.
2. It is of relevance that - so far! - no other accusations have popped up to establish a pattern. But let's better wait a few days or weeks before weighing this! If Franken has been in similar situations in the past (a male-dominated environment, a female entertainer known for sexiness), it might be likely there were more incidents of this kind
3. He quickly reacted - acknowledging the legitimacy of the accusation, and offering to have it tested in an impartial investigation.

I think Alabama voters ought not vote for Moore - not so much on account of one incident in the past, but because of his past patterns of behaviour (he was a known predatore of little girls!!) and his current denial of the same - PLUS because of his self-righteous politics.
But IF Alabamans vote Moore to the Senate, I think Senate has no business removing him. The accusations were well in the past, and he cannot be concicted for any crime even if one was committed. A grave measure like eviction from Senate should not be done on foul smell alone.

Similarly, if Franken owns up to this past incident (and so far, his reaction looks promising), and if it doesn't turn out this was part of a pattern, I see no need to have him leave the Senate. Let voters take care of that when and if he is up for re-election (in 3 years).

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Big Dog (Post 12079597)
I was referring to this thread. You know where people post her pictures and her history as a model and waitress to assert that with that history she has had much worse...

You know classic slut shaming.

Because we all know that her history has absolutely nothing at all to justify the senators actions.

Nothing. Classic victim blaming. Really contemptible arguments.

You do realise that you are tarring all liberals in this thread for the actions of one?

d4m10n 16th November 2017 05:42 PM

A study in contrasts...

https://twitter.com/alfranken/status/441764663097712640




Oystein 16th November 2017 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 12079593)
...
As much as anything else, Trump's election is a reaction years of hypocrisy and shrill preaching from the left. You lost the option of keeping yourself above it all a long time ago.

This is 50% nonsense.
Trump's nomination as the GOP candidate, against all odds, against the party leadership, was a reaction years of hypocrisy and shrill preaching from the right, i.e. within the Republican party. The "swamp" Trump offered to drain, the establishment he was fighting, is as much the Republicans' as the Democrats'.

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oystein (Post 12079582)
Utter nonsense.

Hang on? What Moore is accused of would be called "Grooming" these days, why should he not be in prison? (other than that the incident happened so long ago it can't be prosecuted.)

Oystein 16th November 2017 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Big Dog (Post 12079597)
...
You know classic slut shaming.

Because we all know that her history has absolutely nothing at all to justify the senators actions.
...

I think this is one of the lies you were asked to stop repeating.

Please stop repeating this lie. It is utter, vile nonsense. As I explained above.

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy (Post 12079600)
What, really? Did you not read my earlier post where I nearly literally said "hey what about this secret Congressional hush money fund?"

I you think Franken's deeds disqualify him from public office, that's fine, but I don't think it would cost a million dollars a year in sexual harassment lawsuit settlements. Yet someone is spending that much. I want to know who they are, and question whether they should be in public office, not least of which because they clearly feel entitled to the use of taxpayer funds to sweep their misdeeds under the rug.

Totally agree, can you imagine the scandal if it had come out that FOX or WB or Universal had million dollar slush funds to pay out abuse claims and keep it hush hush. Not only should any politicians involved in sexual harassment and abuse be outed, and their law suits paid by themselves, those that broke the law need to be dealt with by the law, and those that didn't manage to get to that stage need to stand down and let their electorates decide their fates.

Oystein 16th November 2017 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079612)
Hang on? What Moore is accused of would be called "Grooming" these days, why should he not be in prison? (other than that the incident happened so long ago it can't be prosecuted.)

Well, that's why.
There were two possibilities:
1. Charged and convicted before statue of limitations ran out. Then he may have gone to jail 35 years ago and would have been out more than 30 years ago - in which case he definitely should not be in jail (present tense).
2. Statue of limitation ran out - can't be charges and convicted, and should not be in jail.

Either way: Should not be in jail, period.

Unless someone is proposing he should have been jailed for 30+ years.

Stacko 16th November 2017 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079619)
Totally agree, can you imagine the scandal if it had come out that FOX or WB or Universal had million dollar slush funds to pay out abuse claims and keep it hush hush. Not only should any politicians involved in sexual harassment and abuse be outed, and their law suits paid by themselves, those that broke the law need to be dealt with by the law, and those that didn't manage to get to that stage need to stand down and let their electorates decide their fates.

Did you miss how they handled Ailes and O'Reilly?

JoeMorgue 16th November 2017 06:00 PM

Jesus.

Mods can we just rename this the "Whataboutism" section of the forum?

logger 16th November 2017 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079087)
Franken shoud announce his retirement after his current term ends at a minimum.
First person who tries to let Franken off the hook because he is on "Our" side I will treat just like I treat the idiots who are supporting Moore. Granted, what Moore did was worse then what Franken did ,but that is no excuse.

Except there isnít any proof on what Moore did.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079609)
You do realise that you are tarring all liberals in this thread for the actions of one?

actually there have been more than a few people supporting that in this thread, but in point of fact I was commenting on Noah's suggestion.

logger 16th November 2017 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis (Post 12079596)
Franken probably will step down. Quite likely this will happen sooner rather than later.

I'm still not on board with the idea that they are equally bad actions. They are both bad things to do but one kiss with a grown woman is just, in my opinion, not equal to or worse than locking a child in your car and going grab hands on her.

Except one there is proof, the other there isnít.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12079287)
Relevant, I hate to go for the history thing, it's not always fair. But this does seem at least a little relevant.

....

This is interesting:

So is the Greg Gutfeld interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qBpS_Nhr8E
Pro-gun and a lot of sexual innuendo jokes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12079307)
You do have to wonder how this stands out in her mind as the quintessential sexual harassment when clearly it must have been common in her life. You would think she had a gazillion worse complaints to be made.

Link is NSFW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oystein (Post 12079616)
I think this is one of the lies you were asked to stop repeating.

Please stop repeating this lie. It is utter, vile nonsense. As I explained above.

Yeah, it is not a lie because her history and her photographs have nothing to do with and do not in any way justify his conduct. Bringing them up is blatant obvious slut shaming.

SG linked the accuser's bikini pictures in this thread and I am being accused of "vile" nonsense

logger 16th November 2017 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 12079593)
Haha oh wow. "Let the liberals take care of this"? Like you took care of Bill Clinton? Like you took care of all the liberal money men in Hollywood who've been getting a free pass for decades?

As much as anything else, Trump's election is a reaction years of hypocrisy and shrill preaching from the left. You lost the option of keeping yourself above it all a long time ago.

This, excellent post and response.

NoahFence 16th November 2017 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Big Dog (Post 12079640)
actually there have been more than a few people supporting that in this thread, but in point of fact I was commenting on Noah's suggestion.

NoahFence.
Use my name Dog

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoahFence (Post 12079653)
NoahFence.
Use my name Dog

'k.

Oh dear.....

logger 16th November 2017 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12079307)
You do have to wonder how this stands out in her mind as the quintessential sexual harassment when clearly it must have been common in her life. You would think she had a gazillion worse complaints to be made.

Link is NSFW.

Wow, I canít believe Iím seeing this from you.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by logger (Post 12079656)
Wow, I canít believe Iím seeing this from you.

careful, pointing out that this thread contains a NSFW link to the accuser's bikini pictures for absolutely no *********** purpose whatsoever is a "vile" "lie" or something.

logger 16th November 2017 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079427)
I think that what Franken is accused of doing is NOT as bad as what Moore did.
But it's bad enough so that his political career should end.

Except there isnít any proof of what Moore is accused of.

Brainster 16th November 2017 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oystein (Post 12079580)
While I think that Ginger's arguments are biased and kinda miss the mark, you keep misconstruing them badly.

Ginger certainly did not shame Tweeden by referencing her well-known career in being a sexy model, as in "shame on the victim, she had it coming".

The argument is rather this: Although it is wrong, it is very likely that Tweeden has experienced a number of sexual harrassments and perhaps even assaults in her life - and very likely more than many other women her age because she is a sexy model and many men perceive her as a pin-up more than as a human being with dignity. And therefore, Ginger seems to question why Tweeden has come out to complain about Al Franken, but not about any other instances of having beem harrassed.

That is the most amazing job of bending over backwards that I have ever seen. I mean, seriously? Her claim is only credible if she mentions the hundred other times some schnook nobody has ever heard of behaved like a jackass to her? What is the point?

JoeMorgue 16th November 2017 06:26 PM

Ted: Bill, someone from your side has done something wrong.
Bill: Yes I understand that.
Ted: Okay make a statement.
Bill: A member of my side has done something bad....
Ted: Good...
Bill ... but it's not as bad as this thing someone from the other side did!
Ted: No, no. We're not talking about the other side right now.
Bill: *Confused head tilt, like a dog that's just been shown a card trick.*
Ted: Okay let's try this again. What happened?
Bill: Someone from my side did something wrong.
Ted: Good.
Bill: But I need to remind everyone of this think the other side did.
Ted: Okay you were doing good... and then you weren't. Okay I want you to say that someone from your side did something wrong.
Bill: Got it.
Ted: And then... just stop talking.
Bill: Alright I'll try. Someone from my side did something wrong.
Ted: Good, good.
Bill: But....
Ted: No... no...
Bill: *Bites his lip... pounds his fist on the table... starts turning red....*
Ted: Jesus just say it before you explode.
Bill: BUT THE OTHER SIDE! *Collapses back in his chair, gasping and flushed.* Oh I barely survived that.

Seriously it's like watching Jim Carrery try to say "The pen is blue."

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oystein (Post 12079624)
Well, that's why.
There were two possibilities:
1. Charged and convicted before statue of limitations ran out. Then he may have gone to jail 35 years ago and would have been out more than 30 years ago - in which case he definitely should not be in jail (present tense).
2. Statue of limitation ran out - can't be charges and convicted, and should not be in jail.

Either way: Should not be in jail, period.

Unless someone is proposing he should have been jailed for 30+ years.

The trouble is that I don't believe Travis is talking about either of these. Rather that what he did was illegal, and so he should be in prison because that's what happens to people who do illegal things. He's not worrying about the legalities of the issue, just that the action was illegal.

However let's break it down. The first question is, should there even be a statue of limitations on Sexual abuse and assault, especially given that we know that it can take years, if not decades, for victims to come forward, be it due to fear of reprisals,of not being believed, or what it could do to their families. Should abuses be able to get away with things just because they managed to intimidate their victims well enough that they don't get accused in time?

If you were to support the view that there should be no time limit to sexual misconduct allegations, then the statement that "Moore should be in Jail" is not at all nonsense, but rather a statement of position against Statue of Limitations on Sex Crimes.

This seems to me to be quite a legitimate comment to make.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brainster (Post 12079662)
That is the most amazing job of bending over backwards that I have ever seen. I mean, seriously? Her claim is only credible if she mentions the hundred other times some schnook nobody has ever heard of behaved like a jackass to her? What is the point?

I do not know, it appears that because she worked at hooters and took sexy pictures and was probably groped worse that... uh.... she should not be complaining about Senator Al Franken groping her or something?

**** if I know.

Anyway, there is a link to her bikini pictures in this thread for some damn reason, but not for slut shaming.

logger 16th November 2017 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079666)
The trouble is that I don't believe Travis is talking about either of these. Rather that what he did was illegal, and so he should be in prison because that's what happens to people who do illegal things. He's not worrying about the legalities of the issue, just that the action was illegal.

However let's break it down. The first question is, should there even be a statue of limitations on Sexual abuse and assault, especially given that we know that it can take years, if not decades, for victims to come forward, be it due to fear of reprisals,of not being believed, or what it could do to their families. Should abuses be able to get away with things just because they managed to intimidate their victims well enough that they don't get accused in time?

If you were to support the view that there should be no time limit to sexual misconduct allegations, then the statement that "Moore should be in Jail" is not at all nonsense, but rather a statement of position against Statue of Limitations on Sex Crimes.

This seems to me to be quite a legitimate comment to make.

From what we know now. Franken would be charged and Moore wouldnít. Itís that pesky evidence thing.

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by logger (Post 12079643)
Except one there is proof, the other there isnít.

Actually there isn't, the picture doesn't show what is claimed because a) he's not touching her, and b) she's wearing a flack jacket so what she claimed would be impossible to do anyways. However, while he didn't actually grope her while she slept, he did mimic doing so, and that is still serious, IMO.

There is more proof that Moore did what he is claimed to have done because there are now about 9 claimants, whereas there is one claimant to Franken's kiss.

Giz 16th November 2017 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis (Post 12078801)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeann_Tweeden

She has also appeared on the political discussion series Hannity, as a member of the "Great American Panel" and occasionally appeared on the panel of Red Eye w/ Greg Gutfeld.[4]

In 1996, Tweeden appeared non-nude in a fitness model pictorial for Playboy magazine. Fifteen years later, at 38 years old, she appeared again in the December, 2011 issue of Playboy, this time posing in a nude pictorial. IIn 2002, she was a guest character in the motocross video game Freekstyle as a motocross rider. The March 2007 Issue of FHM (which was the final printed US issue) featured Tweeden as the cover girl.[5] As part of Hooters' 25th anniversary in 2008, she was named among "The Top Hooters Girls of all time".[6]


More context.

Wow. The "she wore a short skirt" defense in 2017.

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by logger (Post 12079673)
From what we know now. Franken would be charged and Moore wouldn’t. It’s that pesky evidence thing.

I seriously doubt that Franken would be charged, with the kiss she did consent, though pressured, but a non-consensual kiss is not actually illegal anyways. On the photo, IMO it is very wrong because you shouldn't treat anyone like that, but pretending to squeeze her boobs isn't illegal. You can tell he didn't actually do it, at least in the photo because a) he's not touching her, and b) the flack jacket would prevent him from doing so. Moore certainly could have been charged had the allegations been made at the time, what he is alleged to have done certainly was illegal.

JoeMorgue 16th November 2017 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giz (Post 12079682)
Wow. The "she wore a short skirt" defense in 2017.

Was the skirt a Democrat or Republican?

logger 16th November 2017 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079677)
Actually there isn't, the picture doesn't show what is claimed because a) he's not touching her, and b) she's wearing a flack jacket so what she claimed would be impossible to do anyways. However, while he didn't actually grope her while she slept, he did mimic doing so, and that is still serious, IMO.

There is more proof that Moore did what he is claimed to have done because there are now about 9 claimants, whereas there is one claimant to Franken's kiss.

A claimant? That is not proof at all. A witness to the kiss along with this photo is all she needs. Not to mention his alleged harassment of her the whole time. The other perv had allegations of over 40 years ago with no proof except allegation. ;)

d4m10n 16th November 2017 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giz (Post 12079682)
Wow. The "she wore a short skirt" defense in 2017.

She wore a short skirt, years earlier.

(Flak jacket at the time.)

logger 16th November 2017 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079684)
I seriously doubt that Franken would be charged, with the kiss she did consent, though pressured, but a non-consensual kiss is not actually illegal anyways. On the photo, IMO it is very wrong because you shouldn't treat anyone like that, but pretending to squeeze her boobs isn't illegal. You can tell he didn't actually do it, at least in the photo because a) he's not touching her, and b) the flack jacket would prevent him from doing so. Moore certainly could have been charged had the allegations been made at the time, what he is alleged to have done certainly was illegal.

We haven’t gotten as far as did he actually grab them. There was also a witness to that. Besides, it looks to me like he’s touching. It’s clearly assault.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giz (Post 12079682)
Wow. The "she wore a short skirt" defense in 2017.

I have been instructed that pointing that out is a "vile" "lie" because she probably got more groped while working at hooters or wearing a bikini and here are the bikini pictures and therefore ... step two missing...Reelect Al Franken!

quadraginta 16th November 2017 06:43 PM

I wonder how long we'll have to wait for Moore to ask for an independent ethics investigation of the accusations being made against him.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.