Man charged with sexual impropriety; presumed guilty. - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14868658
When I was a girl, mother would say "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" which she interpreted as the punishment should fit the crime.


So the Democrats are lining up to sacrifice Franklin. I've said before that first woman, the one he French kissed, doesn't have a case, full stop. The others are pretty tame, too. Yes unwanted, annoying etc, but really, would any of them make it into a court of law? This is nuts. He's too good a senator to lose his seat over a pat. Why? One woman, a Senator, said it was too difficult to grade all these offences.

For Pete's sake, lady nearly all your laws are graded!
#14868676
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Hard to keep track of all the allegations so I appreciate this effort, @blackjack21.

Indeed. It's quite the witch trial atmosphere over here these days.

Another woman says Franken tried to forcibly kiss her
The former staffer said she ducked to avoid Franken’s lips. As she hastily left the room, she said, Franken told her: “It’s my right as an entertainer.”


Godstud wrote:Kapeesh?

Do you mean 'capisce'?

Drlee wrote:I doubt we could get American women to wear burkas so getting women out of the marketplace and back to being homemakers would help even more. And it would have the additional benefit of driving wages for men up because the number of available employees would shrink. This would help to break the oligarchs hold on the workers. Then because women are home where they belong we will no longer need illegal aliens in domestic jobs because the women could do them as before. We would need fewer child care centers so these (mostly) woman workers could stay home. This would help solve the illegal immigration problem. Think of how much nicer our roads and highways would be if women no longer crowded them going to and from work with a stop at day care. And our children would do better at school with mom not to tired to help with their homework. Vacations would be easier because we would not have to align two concurrent vacations. And, of course, with the exception of those women who eat all day, obesity should go down dramatically as honey starts cooking again and we get off of our fast food diet.

I'm sold. Women should go back to the 50's. I remember them. It was a much nicer time.

Make America Great Again!

But wait... what about male models?

‘Terrifying and humiliating’: male models accuse fashion photographer Bruce Weber of sexual harassment

Both men described separate experiences of meeting Weber for casting sessions during which the photographer, known for his sexually charged work, instructed them to remove their clothes, fondle themselves and then engage in sexual activity.

Well...

Stormsmith wrote:When I was a girl, mother would say "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" which she interpreted as the punishment should fit the crime.

So you think that Tweeden should take a picture of herself grabbing Al Franken's boobs?

Stormsmith wrote:So the Democrats are lining up to sacrifice Franklin. I've said before that first woman, the one he French kissed, doesn't have a case, full stop. The others are pretty tame, too. Yes unwanted, annoying etc, but really, would any of them make it into a court of law? This is nuts. He's too good a senator to lose his seat over a pat.

Well said. That's why nobody cares about accusations against Trump and Moore. Sexual harassment was just a tort to attack Republicans, but it ended up causing the Democrats more problems than the Republicans.
#14868678
Blackjack21 wrote:Do you mean 'capisce'?
Nope.

kapeesh
Verb

Meaning of "Understand?"

Also spelt kapeesh, capeesh. An anglicization of the Italian capisci orig. U.S. - Used commonly amongst American-Italian gangsters and mobsters alike.



:D
#14868728
Stormsmith wrote:
So the Democrats are lining up to sacrifice Franklin. I've said before that first woman, the one he French kissed, doesn't have a case, full stop. The others are pretty tame, too. Yes unwanted, annoying etc, but really, would any of them make it into a court of law? This is nuts. He's too good a senator to lose his seat over a pat. Why? One woman, a Senator, said it was too difficult to grade all these offences.


This comment is a bit odd considering what you said in the Roy Moore threat. And surely political expedience shouldn't play a role in assessing sexual harassment claims.

Anyway, there are two developments that explain this. Firstly, the mantra that the victim must be believed and the tolerance (at best) or encouragement (at worst) to conflate any and all allegations as similarly horrific is coming back to bite the left. Secondly, Franken may be a worthwhile sacrifice if this ultimately helps taking down Trump.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not sure if the wider moral panic is worth its own thread, so I'm posting this here:

New York Post wrote:
New Yorkers call for removal of Met painting that ‘sexualizes’ girl

Image

New Yorkers launched a petition demanding that the Metropolitan Museum of Art remove a 1938 painting of a young woman with her underwear exposed due to the “current climate around sexual assault” — but the Met refused Sunday.

The piece, “Thérèse Dreaming” by the French artist Balthus, “sexualizes” the girl by depicting her lounging in a skirt with her knee up on a chair, according to the petition, which was posted on the website Care 2.

“Given the current climate around sexual assault … The Met is romanticizing voyeurism and the objectification of children.”

It proclaims, “The [Met is] a renowned institution and one of the largest, most respected art museums in the United States.

“I am simply asking The Met to more carefully vet the art on its walls, and understand what this painting insinuates.

“Ultimately, it’s a small ask in consideration of how expansive their art collection is … how overtly sexual the painting is, and the current news headlines highlighting a macro issue about the public health and safety of women.”

The petition, which launched Friday, had raked in nearly 7,000 signatures by Sunday evening.

But a rep for the museum said it won’t remove the painting because art is meant to reflect many time periods — not just the current one.

“[Our] mission is to collect, study, conserve, and present significant works of art across all times and cultures in order to connect people to creativity, knowledge, and ideas,” said spokesman Kenneth Weine.

“Moments such as this provide an opportunity for conversation, and visual art is one of the most significant means we have for reflecting on both the past and the present.”

[...]


I'm thinking that all putti should probably also be taken down. Having naked babies on display is akin to encouraging pedophiles.
#14868753
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:This comment is a bit odd considering what you said in the Roy Moore thread


I don't see Franklin as having the leverage over these women Billy O'Reilly etc had over their staffs, and Franklin was unlikely to be power pushing. Any overlap in employment is more likely to be opportunistic
#14868844
Man you guys are cynical as shit. 90% of people aren't shit, they just have some room for improvement. Sometimes lots of room sure, but I refuse to believe that we are fixed into that attitude. If 10% of us are good then it stands to reason you can bring other people to that level. We aren't affixed in place by evolution.
#14868849
I find it odd that the whole presumption of innocence thing gets tossed around solely in sexual assault cases.

For example, there was recently a thread about a Latino who was found not guilty of killing a woman, and all the conservatives lined up to describe how he was actually guilty. This seems like a presumption of guilt even after he was found not guilty. Why was there no discussion about the presumption of his innocence, or lack thereof?
#14868851
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:This comment is a bit odd considering what you said in the Roy Moore threat.

This is why the Democrats are failing politically. They've basically moved beyond policy positions into identity politics. So while they have become less relevant in terms of economic issues, they are simultaneously adopting a position fruaght with peril as their own members are guilty of activity they want to use in order to condemn their political opponents. In religion, they call this hypocrisy. In waging a war of ideas, I'd characterize it as a strategic failure.

Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Firstly, the mantra that the victim must be believed and the tolerance (at best) or encouragement (at worst) to conflate any and all allegations as similarly horrific is coming back to bite the left.

Another irony is that it has put people like Tucker Carlson on FoxNews in a morally superior position as he defends people like Al Franken from the anonymous attackers, pointing out the 6th Amendment right to confront an accuser while the Democrats and much of the media adopt the historically indefensible position of believing an accuser a priori if the accuser is a woman and the charge is related to sex. While it is somewhat off-topic, we've also seen similar instances in race-related debates where a black person vandalizes his/her own car with anti-black rhetoric or posts some anti-black rhetoric in a military dorm to incite outrage and bring down recriminations on whites, only to be discovered that it was not some racist who posted the material (a byproduct of the surveillance state).

Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Secondly, Franken may be a worthwhile sacrifice if this ultimately helps taking down Trump.

It's likely that some are making that calculation--ergo, if Franken must go; then, Trump must go too. However, in the Franken case, it's the picture that does him in, because that will be used against the Democrats. As I said, an adjunct to the notion of hypocrisy is the phrase, "People who live in glass houses should not throw stones." It's amazing that a year after Hillary Clinton was defeated for the presidency, there still isn't much reflection on her own role in her failure.

Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Not sure if the wider moral panic is worth its own thread, so I'm posting this here:

Well that's a good point too. Do we now have to pull Nabakov from the library too? Apparently youth shouldn't be exposed to Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird since it depicts racism in the South in the 1950s, and some people may be horrified by the language used. However, apparently now we need to review Vladimir Nabakov's Lolita, because Roy Moore might not be a predator, but rather a victim if he read this and decided that dating teenagers was okay. He might have seen Stanley Kubrick's film adaptation, which we may need to re-rate as XXX since it involves a sexual relationship between a middle aged man and a 12 year old girl. Who are the book burners now?

Stormsmith wrote:I don't see Franklin as having the leverage over these women Billy O'Reilly etc had over their staffs, and Franklin was unlikely to be power pushing.

So sexual assault is okay if you aren't employing somebody or working together professionally? Roy Moore wasn't employing anybody either.
#14868938
Pants-of-dog wrote:I find it odd that the whole presumption of innocence thing gets tossed around solely in sexual assault cases.

For example, there was recently a thread about a Latino who was found not guilty of killing a woman, and all the conservatives lined up to describe how he was actually guilty. This seems like a presumption of guilt even after he was found not guilty. Why was there no discussion about the presumption of his innocence, or lack thereof?

The presumption of innocence should be tossed around in all cases. However, sometimes race and politics raises its ugly head as in the O.J. Simpson case. After such a case, there is sometimes discussions of what if.
#14868950
Drlee wrote:I have avoided posting on this page.

Clearly women can't handle equality.


There it is in a nutshell. Women should know all there is to know about passive aggressive behavior. They should know enough to understand that they ought not teach it to men.

But congratulations women. You have won a great battle. It is sure going to cost you. Just yesterday I had a friend say that he decided not to hire a new consultant because "she was too pretty" and that he would be "defenseless against her" if she made any accusations.

Clearly Islam is out on front on this one. Burkas would solve a big part of the problem.

I doubt we could get American women to wear burkas so getting women out of the marketplace and back to being homemakers would help even more. And it would have the additional benefit of driving wages for men up because the number of available employees would shrink. This would help to break the oligarchs hold on the workers. Then because women are home where they belong we will no longer need illegal aliens in domestic jobs because the women could do them as before. We would need fewer child care centers so these (mostly) woman workers could stay home. This would help solve the illegal immigration problem. Think of how much nicer our roads and highways would be if women no longer crowded them going to and from work with a stop at day care. And our children would do better at school with mom not to tired to help with their homework. Vacations would be easier because we would not have to align two concurrent vacations. And, of course, with the exception of those women who eat all day, obesity should go down dramatically as honey starts cooking again and we get off of our fast food diet.

I'm sold. Women should go back to the 50's. I remember them. It was a much nicer time.


:lol: What is this? Sounds like you need a lie down or maybe your ilk can die out soon, thanks in advance :D .
#14868966
Stormsmith wrote:
I don't see Franklin as having the leverage over these women Billy O'Reilly etc had over their staffs, and Franklin was unlikely to be power pushing. Any overlap in employment is more likely to be opportunistic

He's a senator, one of the most powerful positions one can have in the US.

Anyway, what happens with Franken shouldn't really surprise you and it was one of my points when I replied to you in the other thread. If you unleash a moral panic treating any allegation as equally serious because women must be supported and anything else is equivalent to blaming the victim, this has a habit of sprawling out of control and hitting people that may not really deserve it or even innocents, while real and serious predators become just one of many. There are quite likely other unintended and unexpected side effects yet to come.

blackjack21 wrote:Another irony is that it has put people like Tucker Carlson on FoxNews in a morally superior position as he defends people like Al Franken from the anonymous attackers, pointing out the 6th Amendment right to confront an accuser while the Democrats and much of the media adopt the historically indefensible position of believing an accuser a priori if the accuser is a woman and the charge is related to sex.

At this point I think the left has to be considered completely unstable on this matter. They went from almost everything goes wrt sex to let's lock people up based on the most unbelievable story extracted from children via suggestive questioning to lining up behind a Dem president against "bimbo eruptions" to now presuming every man guilty until proven otherwise while insisting that there should be no gender segregated places any longer. They certainly seem to have a disproportionate number of people who are either obsessed or have a very unhealthy relationship with sex in one way or another, and maybe whatever they push depends on which unstable sub-group wins at any given time. If you add identity politics where the most hysterical end up at the top of the hierarchy, you might well get completely contradictory positions because all of them must be served and appeased.

blackjack21 wrote:Who are the book burners now?

Exactly. This and other issues should make it increasingly difficult for the left to maintain that they are the rational, objective and pro-science side. The only question is whether the right will be able to exploit this. Considering their seemingly unlimited capacity to miss these opportunities I'm not too optimistic, although I hope I will be pleasantly surprised by them.
#14868968
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:He's a senator, one of the most powerful positions one can have in the US.


All of these women's complaints predated his running for office in 2008


Anyway, what happens with Franken shouldn't really surprise you and it was one of my points when I replied to you in the other thread. If you unleash a moral panic treating any allegation as equally serious because women must be supported and anything else is equivalent to blaming the victim, this has a habit of sprawling out of control and hitting people that may not really deserve it or even innocents, while real and serious predators become just one of many. There are quite likely other unintended and unexpected side effects yet to come.


Please go back and re-read my original post and the following up one I wrote you for clarification. I didn't unleash anything.
Last edited by Stormsmith on 07 Dec 2017 22:52, edited 1 time in total.
#14868969
Stormsmith wrote:
All of these women's complaints predated his running for office in 2008

Here's the list of allegations. Two allegations are about events during his campaign and two after he became senator.

Stormsmith wrote:Please go back and re-read my original. post. I didn't unleash anything.

The "you" in my post is not meant to be you personally, but the general you.
#14868971
I see. Yes. Agreed. This is what happened to Franklin compared to the judge. They aren't getting due process, and neither are most of the women. Moore, who may have fondled a 14 yr old girl (too young to give consent) in her knickers and bra, may be elected to to Senate, whereas Franklin was pushed out of his Senate seat for a little slap and tickled with mature women.
#14868989
Stormsmith wrote:I see. Yes. Agreed. This is what happened to Franklin compared to the judge. They aren't getting due process, and neither are most of the women. Moore, who may have fondled a 14 yr old girl (too young to give consent) in her knickers and bra, may be elected to to Senate, whereas Franklin was pushed out of his Senate seat for a little slap and tickled with mature women.

Yep, and he was pushed out by his own party, because they want to use that issue against Moore and Trump--even though they already lost an election to Trump with that scandal being presented one month before the election, just like the case with Moore. Al Franken's behavior, while inappropriate, really doesn't deserve all that much attention. The problem is that he has a history as a comedian, and thinks some things are funny. So when there is visual evidence of inappropriate activity, there isn't much the Democrats can do. They have to make sure people aren't laughing at Franken's behavior in those pictures if they expect people to take the issue seriously.

Franken says his resignation isn't for a few weeks, which to me suggests he's going to raise a ruckus if Roy Moore wins. The Democrats will probably try to prevent him from being seated.

Apparently, Trent Franks (R-Arizona) may be resigning under rumors of sexual harassment too.

I wonder when we're going to level the playing field and start suing tight short skirt wearing tarts with cleavage spilling out all over the place during business hours. For all the flirting and taunting that women do, they sure seem overly upset when someone starts hitting on them, and usually so many years later that their outrage seems implausible.
#14868991
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Exactly. This and other issues should make it increasingly difficult for the left to maintain that they are the rational, objective and pro-science side. The only question is whether the right will be able to exploit this. Considering their seemingly unlimited capacity to miss these opportunities I'm not too optimistic, although I hope I will be pleasantly surprised by them.

It will have to come from an outsider like President Trump because the established Republicans have shown that they are too wimpy.
#14868997
blackjack21 wrote: For all the flirting and taunting that women do, they sure seem overly upset when someone starts hitting on them, and usually so many years later that their outrage seems implausible.





Cause it ain't our faults that we naturally commit sexual harassment on women of all races while we want to deny that same right to people of darker shades and faiths. :hmm:

I mean they were asking for it, right? They were dressing in loose clothing and one female was saying that guy was cute, that give us permission to grope.

But again, since women shouldn't have right to vote in your eyes, lets advocate some gender jim crow. Separation of men and women in business in general.

I mean, in our minds the women should feel privilege being rape by us. I mean it's only natural, we can't help ourselves. So to cool our urges let's have separate but equal work places.
Just don't let your daughter attend any young republican conferences or work at any "family values" corporation :lol:

But can you give evidence women flirt more? I like how when you have evidence to support your projection you lay out sources, but when you say general statements, you have no facts to back that up.
#14869149
blackjack21 wrote:I wonder when we're going to level the playing field and start suing tight short skirt wearing tarts with cleavage spilling out all over the place during business hours. For all the flirting and taunting that women do, they sure seem overly upset when someone starts hitting on them, and usually so many years later that their outrage seems implausible.

Have you converted to Islam? That seems a remarkably fundamentalist line to take. Do you really think that normal men are so tortured by the site of a shapely leg that the woman is evil just for showing it?

Your claimed inability to control your urges is like a thief saying "but that beautiful iPhone was just sitting there on the counter - how could I resist? We should ban all public display of wealth, because it taunts us non-millionaires".
#14870148
Drlee wrote:Clearly women can't handle equality.

There it is in a nutshell. Women should know all there is to know about passive aggressive behavior. They should know enough to understand that they ought not teach it to men.

There's a bit more to this I think. We are maybe seeing a difference between men and women in conflict resolution. Somewhat simplified, the male ideal is standing up for oneself, while females tend to rally around the victim. It's probably related to another difference where males establish hierarchies and women enforce equality.

What speaks for this hypothesis is that we've been seeing this equality enforcement and protection of perceived or real victims a lot in our (female dominated) education system, e.g. no streaming, no special schools for special needs kids, ever expanding bullying initiatives with an ever expanding definition of bullying, and more bizarre ideas like completely gender-neutral education starting in preschool, no overt competitions with winners and losers, and more recently encouraging kids to not have a best friend because this excludes other children.

Assuming there is anything to this, the situation is going to stay dysfunctional unless we are prepared to acknowledge that there may well be differences between the sexes. Without it, all we get is a great deal of confusion and cognitive dissonance, as everybody insists that we are all the same and the differences everyone experiences are cast in terms of evil oppression by one side over the other, i.e. the patriarchy.

The BBC is pushing the US State Dept's point of vi[…]

Syrian war thread

The sheepdog meets its master, the sapper who retu[…]

Right Wing Marxism?

Is it possible to be a right-wing Marxist? I've be[…]

Have you revised your precious views on this? ;)[…]