Oy Poor Roy Moore

[Proteus_MST]

Guess, now every honest alt-right cannot do something other than vote for Moore:
It turned up that Moore claimed that the last time the USA were great was during the times of slavery.
He also referred to the native americans as reds and to the chinese as yellows

https://www.yahoo.com/news/roy-moore-believes-america-great-021657630.html

Definitely fittting to the current GOP government

[Kidlicious]

Maxine Waters continues to lie about Deutche Bank and POTUS, repeating the lie that Meuller has focused his investigation on the bank, and saying that it's a money laundering operation.

[Kidlicious]

AL state govt has removed a political ad containing false information that if people vote for Moore the community will know that they voted for a child predator.

[rah]

Which doesn't change the fact that he was a child predator.

[self biased]

they should have just amended the billboard to "alleged child predator."

by the by, does anyone know offhand what the age of consent is in Alabama? It seems relevant to this discussion. Well, insofar as there are people discussing it alongside Kidicious shrieking like a banshee.

[Kidlicious]

they should have just amended the billboard to "alleged child predator."

by the by, does anyone know offhand what the age of consent is in Alabama? It seems relevant to this discussion. Well, insofar as there are people discussing it alongside Kidicious shrieking like a banshee.

"Alleged child predator" gives the impression that one he is accused of being a child predator, which is the way the accusor is making the accusation, but the fact is, according to her, she went on a date with him. It also gives the impression that there is a criminal case, which there is not. There never was. The accusor never reported this to the police, or any authority.

But the main problem is that the ad is trying to make voters believe that their vote will be public knowledge. So lying. Not a good way to make people believe unsubstantiated accusations.

[Proteus_MST]

they should have just amended the billboard to "alleged child predator."

by the by, does anyone know offhand what the age of consent is in Alabama? It seems relevant to this discussion. Well, insofar as there are people discussing it alongside Kidicious shrieking like a banshee.

IIRC 16 at the time when Moore was said to be hitting on teens.
Trying to engage in sexual acitities with a 14 years old girl (which was the age of his main acccuser at the tie he suposedly tried to engage in Petting with her) would definitely have been illegal

[rah]

But the main problem is that the ad is trying to make voters believe that their vote will be public knowledge.

Yeah, this part I can agree with. And I don't see why it was necessary when there were so many better ways to go.

[Kidlicious]

Beverly Young Nelson has now admitted to forging Moore's signature.

[Kidlicious]

Moved from wrong thread,

JR,

If he committed sexual misconduct, being a "war hero" is irrelevant.

This is not a logical response.

As you and your ilk are so fond of saying, he was in Vietnam 40 years ago, so it doesn't matter. Also "served in Vietnam" does not equal "war hero." He was a military police company commander. (Nice unfounded leap from "vet" to "hero" btw...)

That's funny coming from people who give medals to people for being especially liberal. Of course he is a hero. Anyone who fought in a war is a hero. Liberals, otoh, are not heros. 40 yrs means nothing. If you did something 40 years ago to be a hero you don't ever stop being a hero. Do WWII veterans ever stop being heros? Of course not.

BTW, the people he served with insist that he has outstanding character, and refused to even go into brothels. Do you think they are liars?

More recent and more relevant is the fact that he twice defied the US Supreme Court (once on the 10 Commandments, then again on gay marriage). Apparently Moore does not respect the rule of law, which is an odd position for a lawyer/judge.

Not what a judge should do IMO. Being a lawyer is not anything which indicates good character. AAR, let the voters decide.

Hell, even Trump didn't support him against Luther Strange.

Trump makes deals, and I suspect that's what happened.

[-Jrabbit]

Your statements make no sense. Plenty of liberals fought in wars. Plenty of criminals fought in wars. Plenty of them were heroes - during the war. Being an MP commander is not heroism; it is doing your job.
But hey, it's good to see you admit that "If you did something 40 years ago" - like being a pervy cradle robber - you don't ever stop being that.
Also: Trump endorsed Strange at the urging of (not sure, either Jared or Don Jr). Bannon wanted him to support Moore. I suspect you're conveniently forgetting that fact.

[Kidlicious]

Nope, never said that a 70 year old man still does what he did when he was 30. I said that if he served in a war when he was 30 he's a hero. Only a liberal would disagree.

I know liberals have served in war. But during Vietnam most liberals dodged the draft -FACT!

[-Jrabbit]

So everyone shipped to a war zone is a hero for life? Even MPs, mechanics, and supply clerks? Nice!
Also, please cite your evidence for linking draft dodging with liberalism. During Vietnam, the vast majority of US soldiers were drafted. The US armed forces of that era were built on forced service, as very few young people were volunteering to go die in a rice paddy. Pretty sure that had nothing to do with their politics - which is why you see conservatives like Cheney, Trump, Romney, Ted Nugent, Rudy Giuliani, and Newt Gingrich on most lists of prominent people who avoided the draft.

[Kidlicious]

Proteus,

If the accusations are believable and lots of people say the same about her and my own mothers defenmse would only be lame, especially as she, herself, made statements that strongly suggest that she actually did it, then I would definitely not outright dismiss the accusations against her as lies

So if your mother was running for office and someone accused her of child abuse right before the election you would believe them, AGAINST YOUR OWN MOTHER!?

[Proteus_MST]

:::

That's funny coming from people who give medals to people for being especially liberal. Of course he is a hero. Anyone who fought in a war is a hero. Liberals, otoh, are not heros. 40 yrs means nothing. If you did something 40 years ago to be a hero you don't ever stop being a hero. Do WWII veterans ever stop being heros? Of course not.

:::

Doesn't matter whether you call him a war hero or a war veteran.
Former participants in wars aren't immune to commiting crimes after returning from a war.
(and often the reason for them commiting crimes can be found in their participation in the war ... for example because of PTSD that remains untreated (because they often have problems to procure the necessary money to pay for the psychologists/psychiatrists))

Btw., if you call everyone who tok part in a war, even those who "just" served in military police, a war hero, what do you call those people who fulfilled their duty in an extraordinary way (for example by singlehandedly taking out a strong enemy position, or by sacrificing their life for their comrades, by throwing themselves on a hand grenade in order to shield their comrades from the shrapnell)

[Proteus_MST]

Proteus,

So if your mother was running for office and someone accused her of child abuse right before the election you would believe them, AGAINST YOUR OWN MOTHER!?

In case of Moore we are talking not about one single person accusing him, but rather of several persopns doing so ...
and an even larger number saying that he tried to hit on teenage girls in the local mall, or even tried to harrass teenage shop employees.
Likewise his own statements about visiting a dancing competition for teenage girls and seeing his wife, then 15 yo, there doesn't exactly give rise to the assumption that his accusers statements are wrong


Also remember one thing:
Every criminal has father and mother, often brothers, sisters and/or sons/daughters...
what you basically try to say is, that you would believe in your relatives innocence no matter how much evidence

So lets assume your father raped a teenage girl and she testifies against them and even has 2-3 witnesses. Would you, in this case say he didn't do it and will instead villify the victim (i.e. the girl)?

[Kidlicious]

Doesn't matter whether you call him a war hero or a war veteran.
Former participants in wars aren't immune to commiting crimes after returning from a war.
(and often the reason for them commiting crimes can be found in their participation in the war ... for example because of PTSD that remains untreated (because they often have problems to procure the necessary money to pay for the psychologists/psychiatrists))

Btw., if you call everyone who tok part in a war, even those who "just" served in military police, a war hero, what do you call those people who fulfilled their duty in an extraordinary way (for example by singlehandedly taking out a strong enemy position, or by sacrificing their life for their comrades, by throwing themselves on a hand grenade in order to shield their comrades from the shrapnell)

Strawman. I didn't say that they don't commit crimes. I said that I don't believe unsubstantiated accusations made against them right before an election.

[Kidlicious]

In case of Moore we are talking not about one single person accusing him, but rather of several persopns doing so ...
and an even larger number saying that he tried to hit on teenage girls in the local mall, or even tried to harrass teenage shop employees.
Likewise his own statements about visiting a dancing competition for teenage girls and seeing his wife, then 15 yo, there doesn't exactly give rise to the assumption that his accusers statements are wrong


Also remember one thing:
Every criminal has father and mother, often brothers, sisters and/or sons/daughters...
what you basically try to say is, that you would believe in your relatives innocence no matter how much evidence

So lets assume your father raped a teenage girl and she testifies against them and even has 2-3 witnesses. Would you, in this case say he didn't do it and will instead villify the victim (i.e. the girl)?

There is ONE accusor now, if you rule out the one guilty of forgery.