Al Franken is Gone, Sexual Harassment Allegations are Harming Democrats

Stop pretending to be so stupid. Credible accounts from independent victims should be enough to get you fired from your job. There is never likely to be any other evidence. And no, I don't give a shit if Democrats are the only ones doing anything about it, we are morally superior to the opposition.

We do not agree. You are playing the fool and taking things to an absurd conclusion, like the way to prevent auto accidents is to ride a horse.

And think about this; if we believed the women, we wouldn't have Clarence Thomas.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

#mgtow | #wellduh​

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Click because Circle Jerks are time better spent than this discussion.​

Yet here you are still wasting your time chattering at me.

Try it this way: Your pitch↑ has precisely nothing under the sun to do with me.

So, sure, heterosexual men can watch you try to convince a queer that treating women as if they were men is somehow a good idea. But, y'know, really? You're not smart enough to figure this part by yourself?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The problem is, if only Democrats are held accountable to this, then we are, effectively, handing the reigns of the government over to a party that is, through their inaction, giving tacit approval to this behavior.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Only if the Deocratic party is full of creeps, in which case they deserve to lose.

 

I think we are waaaaaayyyy beyond that now, try to keep pace. I have provided now a list of ways to reduce sexual harrasment, your still complaining about step 1 in context to your self, while presenting no solutions what so ever.

Define "credible".

Why not? We have the technology to put cameras everywhere, to record everything!

So how did that moral superiority do for Von Hindenburg supports in 1930's Germany?

First of all, I just told you I agree, you can't tell me I don't agree with you now! My conclusions are not absurd and have been made by thousands/millions of men world wide, and finally the way to prevent auto accidents is to have cars drive themselves. Self driving cars is the most near term and viable way to radically reduce the rate of car accidents. Horses would cost more and be slower and likely increase fatalities through kicks and stumps. Likewise dating apps, porn, sex toys and a minimizing to the point of abstention of sexual propositioning of women is the most near term and viable way to radically reduce sexual harassment. Traditional dating and proposition of women needs to go, it is archaic, outmoded and prone to harassment.

Only if the republicans believed the women, which they don't, as long as women are accusing a republican (they have no problem hounding an accused democrat)

Or the republicans start paying off women to make accusations, at which point the "believe the women" modus operandi would hand total power to the conservatives and Trump.

 

Same as vetting any kind of journalism.

These things generally happen in private, because, you know, people don't want to get caught.

If democracy is over, we have already lost. Make no mistake, the National Socialists won by violating every moral principle in the book, is that your model of politics? Are you going to complain about the Democratic Party's lack of a private militia?

Nope, 11 Democrats approved, resulting in a tie that was broken by Dan Quayle.

O'Keefe already tried this, as I said. He proved this wouldn't work.

 

Journalism? This is a crime not gossip!

Yeah and murders generally happen in private, what is your point? We don't just allow social media to decide who the murder is do we?

Go back to the last moral panic of the 1980's, there was tons of journalism of satanic child fucking was there not? tons of accusations? and that shit happens in private too, at a preschool no less where parents could not see there children getting raped by satanists... at least that shit went to trial!

How is demanding due process equal to the Nazis violating every moral principle in the book?

Go back to what Tina Liebling said.

Oh some specific case decades ago when morality was very different, back then a women could not simply destroy a man, there was no warlock hunt or social media to provide immediate and immense attention and adoration for coming out.

One case where a known incompetent was trying to trick the Washington post. What happens when other republicans find more credible women against even more popular targets. Next you will be telling me hordes of paid trolls can't be used either.

 

You are the one suggesting we use the Nazi Party as a winning example. I wonder what the point of that was.

You no longer need to be taken seriously.

No it isn't. Firing someone for bringing disrespect to an organization does not rise to the level of a criminal trial.

 

Winning example of what happens when you let the immoral use you, yes. Your the one that want to enable them by throwing out due process.

That from a article title I quoted previously: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...nt-warlock-hunt-editorials-debates/108413460/

You don't need to take me seriously, you can just stop replying to me then. Others though are saying what I'm saying and are being taken seriously.

Firing someone for accusations is not the same thing as forcing politicians out for accusations, although it does operate under the same principle, in the long run there will be a whole lot of law suits and counter lawsuits over the next years over this, meanwhile: total republican domination. Imagine republicans hire trolls to swamp accusations against any democrat, former co-workers and interns and staffer can come out and claim what ever and get instant adoration, while the republicans will remain untouchable because their side will scream "fake news".

 

"We" did believe the woman.
Even many of "them" believed the woman.
We got Thomas anyway.

He proved nothing except the possibility of getting caught sometimes - and the fact that there would be no penalty for getting caught.
He's been caught before. He's willing to take that risk. That's how he earns his money - currently 300k per year salary, plus major side benefits.


Consider: one of the main Republican lines, schticks, memes, etc, in all of this, is the claim that "the Democrats" are bribing women and otherwise arranging for false accusation. It's a major line in Alabama right now, influencing the vote. And this has been a common line of theirs for a while now. That, to me, is strong evidence the Republicans are actually doing that - the possibility has gone from speculative to more likely than not. It's the common pattern, right?

 

And that is dishonest.
(As I noted: You posted dishonestly, by pretending the question was another, different one. Extending and elaborating on your dishonesty would not have changed that, of course, and so your question there is deceptive, a pretense that my objection to your pretending was to something else.)
You cannot post honestly in this thread. Literally: can not do it.

You can't post honestly. You simply can't.

So you have to rewrite and alter my example, to include lots more specifics, to assess things. So you agree that circumstances matter.
Gynecologist vs neurosurgeon, cornering and groping underlings trapped on a plane in flight vs patting restaurant wait staff on the ass as they walk by, you have to "posit" more specifics to assess the situation. You can't just go with my illustrative setups - they don't tell you enough.
I rest my case.

And that's a problem - you don't acknowledge other people, what they are thinking, or why.
That's where you miss the impression of incompetence, weakness, flightiness, unreliability, and general fecklessness, the DFL has once again created for itself in Minnesota.
Right now, the progressive hope is that Dayton can pull a rabbit out of this hat with the interim appointment.

No, you posted those examples. I specifically did not, central to my point.

No, I didn't.
And yes, you did (and do, and will, as the bulk of your responses to me - including "whine", for example, and similar vocabulary usage of yours.)

I'm not. That's not honest.

"Excuse"? "Pretend"? my "examples"? You cannot post honestly in this thread.

You'll have a chance to reality check, over the next ten months, what the Democrats "look like" in all of this - if you can.

 

? Seriously? C'mon - you can't be that dim.

No purging by Dems is unwelcome, purging of someone in the Franken crowd least of all. The more open seats in the Dem gallery, while the Reps have the suppression, gerrymander, and Statehouse advantage, the better for the Reps.

 

Your seeming inability to comprehend plain English got old ages ago. Spidergoat said, "I find it ridiculously easy not to sexually harass anyone." Full stop. You said, "It is ridiculously easy not to sexual harass anyone. The steps I laid out are very easy to follow. I'm glade we agree! " (Emphasis mine.)

The "steps" to which you refer are as follows:

Now--try to keep up here, Mike Pence-- Spidergoat made NO such qualifications.

Surely you see the difference, no?

 

Do you honestly believe that any of this nonsense you post bears any resemblance to science? Your analysis here is about as scientific as the "bitches be shoppin" bs you frequently post is, ahem, "evolutionary biology." Sheesh, you struggle with basic reading comprehension and vocabulary (and spelling, for that matter, i.e., they sure as hell aren't typos when you insist upon using terms like "classicism" for "classism" repeatedly). When you haven't even grasped the concept of satire--typically introduced by grade 9, IIRC--you might wanna think twice before attempting a statistical analysis, and inflicting such upon a public audience.

 

Do you honestly think I can be insulted or shamed?

Anyways do you have any counter argument to evolutionary biology, or do you just have insults?

Nope you lost me. How do the qualifications change the argument?

 

If something bad happens to women's rights because reliably-voting Franken's 2018 replacement is a Republican or pushover Dem, will that register in anyone's awareness?

No, it wasn't. It was you pretending my question was something quite different. That was dishonest.

Who's the second?
The Dems are down one reliably progressive vote in the Senate.

You still think you can manage the GOP's messaging like this? Slow learner. This isn't a junior high school debate team event.

That's not true.

No, you aren't.

That would not excuse your response - or change its implications.

You keep on elaborating and "positing" and providing the necessary circumstances, as I observed you would have to (and would lard with dishonesty, also visible), and I'll sit back and watch you demonstrate "zero tolerance" in real life. It looks a lot like the fecklessness demonstration around Franken - but maybe the Minnesota voters won't hold it against the actual, individual candidates in ten months, Dayton will pull a miracle Progressive out of the grab bag without costing the DFL the governorship, Klobuchar won't take too big a hit, the national political effects will be nil, and the only cost long term will have been of Franken's presence during the budget and near term Trump/Russia debacles.

Maybe.

Feelings? You try to reframe my posting as something about feelings? Damn. Kellyanne Conway's got nothing on you, for sheer brass.
You can't post honestly. You simply can't do it.

You cannot post honestly. Try - you can't.

You changed them, in ways central to my contention and deliberately omitted from my posting for that explicit reason.
Which verified my contention, btw.

That's not true - the pilot was at an airport restaurant, easily presumed to haver been on the job, the doc quite possibly networking at medical school reunions and attending hospital organized or otherwise professionally associated New Year's Parties. These circumstances would of course matter - bear on your assessment and response - as we see from your bringing them up.
Resting my case.

Regardless of what they actually did, or the effects on their patients and passengers etc? Seems unlikely. But maybe you are recommending, not describing.
Either way, since we have established the principle of some tolerance rather than zero tolerance, the question arises: what would the analogy be, between stepping out of surgery or landing the plane and Franken's tasks at hand?

Whether the Democrats can exonerate themselves of fatuous self-immolation by finding, recognizing, and selecting from within their ranks an instant Senator of Franken's abilities and reliability, one also capable of winning election in ten months and again in two years, is not known, but it does not depend on whether or not such people exist.