Al Franken Is Toast

nighttimer · Dec 8, 2017

MaeZe said:
Or, just possibly, Franken is the victim of a witch hunt. Just sayin'.

Al Franken is the victimizer, not the victim here and it's not a witch hunt when you're behaving like a witch.

JJ Litke said:
The accusations against Franken were about being too touchy in photo ops. The accusations against Moore and Trump involve pedophilia, molestation, and rape.

THESE THINGS ARE NOT FUCKING EQUAL.

And I have yet to see the Democratic senators calling for Franken to resign put the same energy into denouncing Moore or Trump.

So no one try preaching to me about moral high ground. Because the Democrats sure as fucking hell don't hold that patch of earth.

I'm not a preacher, so there's no preaching here, but its a spurious argument to make, "I have yet to see the Democratic senators calling for Franken to resign put the same energy into denouncing Moore or Trump." Let's rewind and you can pretty much invalidate every word after "Democratic senators."

Roy Moore and Donald Trump are NOT Democrats. They don't care about being denounced by Democrats, liberals, progressives, or left-handed Lyft drivers. Every Democrat in the country could rise up en masse and denounce those two ass clowns and it would not matter one bit to them or their supporters.

Democrats didn't elect them and Democrats don't matter to them. Moore and Trump got zero fucks to give about denouncements by Democrats. If anything, it would only make those who already love Trump and Moore love them even more. They'd be bigger darlings to the Right than they alread are. Pissing off the Dems? Great! We'll take two scoops of that!

Conservatives will not abandon their heroes because liberals consider them villains. The denouncement by Democrats like Franken didn't make one Republican abandon ship on Donald Trump or Jeff Sessions. What impact do you think the pissing and moaning by 48 Democrats has on 52 Republicans anyway?

The crimes committed by Al Franken against women pale in comparison to those committed by Trump and Moore, but they are all crimes only separated by the seriousness of the transgression. Franken is a pig. Trump and Moore are hogs. All three have behaved like swine, but apparently Franken deserves a pass because he's admitted to it and said he's sorry.

What's the message here then? Cop a feel or squeeze a butt and you're good to go, but escalate to sexual assault and rape, and we'll burn ya at the stake? As a man, I'm curious as to what the Rules are here so I don't get 'em confused. Okay, I grabbed her breast, grabbed her butt, but I didn't grab her by the vagina, so I'm cool.

How exactly does this brave new world work? :Huh:

MaeZe said:
I don't want to get into this argument, someone here, people I like, will get mad at me. But I will go this far:

The numbers are meaningless when 6 of the 8 involve people that didn't like the way he hugged them during photo ops. There were people around. It is not the same as sexual predatory behavior.

What numbers wouldn't be meaningless? Eighteen? Eighty? Eight hundred? What's the magic number for you where it does cross the line into sexual predatory behavior?

What's the magic number of women it would take to come forward and say #MeToo includes the surname of Franken right along with Weinstein, Conyers, Allen, Cosby, Simmons, Affleck, Singer, or Moore?

MaeZe said:
That leaves one accusation he denies and one I discussed above.

What's bugging me here is how fast people are to repeating false framing of the Franken case. A fake, not really touching grope becomes a grope. Eight accusers becomes a preponderance of evidence when the accusations are questionable.

Yes, we do. Otherwise we are letting the GOP bully us into ousting one of the more effective Senators merely on how it looks if we say, no, this one is not the same.

Yeah, our history with Bill sucks. That's where the moral high ground has been knocked down more than a few notches.

But we are letting the right wing bully us here over Franken. We (as in the Democrats) repeat the false narrative, don't stand up and say this one really is different, and then talk ourselves into believing if we don't burn Franken at the stake we are hypocrites.

This is different, but its a difference without a distinction. Al Franken preys on women. Roy Moore preys on women too and by this time in a few weeks only one of them will be in the Senate.

I don't know how to make you comfortable with that because I'm not comfortable with it either. It's unfair, but life don't shake out fair for everybody.

Nobody is irreplaceable in politics. Not even Al Franken. Especially, not Al Franken.

In recent weeks, as accusers have come forward with stories of Franken allegedly forcing kisses on them and squeezing their butts during photo-ops, there has been much hand-wringing among Democrats and progressives about how he and the party should respond. Should Franken have resigned immediately after L.A. radio host Leeann Tweeden first accused him of shoving his tongue into her mouth, a claim accompanied by a picture of Franken pretending to grab her breasts while she slept? As my colleague Mark Joseph Stern wrote that day, the credibility of Franken’s party, which had called for alleged child molester Roy Moore to quit the Alabama Senate race, was on the line. Or should Franken have stuck it out and left a Senate ethics investigation to decide his fate? After all, it may do women worse if a far-right conservative wins his open Senate seat than it would have been to leave in place a handsy creep who doesn’t vote against women at every turn.

The dilemma boiled down to this: Democrats could either put themselves at a potential political disadvantage by observing rules of decency Republicans have entirely abandoned, or they could lower themselves into the GOP latrine, keep Franken on the roster, and spend the next several election cycles smelling a little like shit. Democrats seemed content to hold their nose and bear with Franken through the first half-dozen accusations. But when a seventh accuser came forward this week, at least 17 Democratic senators—mostly women—publicly urged Franken to step down, leaving him little choice.

However unfair it may be that Franken is leaving Washington while admitted assailant Donald Trump is still in the White House (Franken called it an “irony” in his remarks on Thursday) and Moore might be on his way to the Senate, it is clear that Democrats, and Franken, made the right call.

Republicans have never held themselves to the same standards of behavior as Democrats, and it will never be a good idea to sink to the GOP’s depths of hypocrisy. Theirs is the party that panders to a set of rabid anti-abortion voters who couldn’t care less about the transgressions of its leaders as long as they vote to curtail women’s bodily autonomy. Its tolerance even extends to men who privately tell their own extramarital girlfriends to get the abortions its voters despise. It’s the party that lifted Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, positions the Violence Against Women Act as an assault on family values, believes equal pay legislation is anti-male, bemoans the days when women stayed home to keep house, and works to make it harder for colleges to combat campus rape. Dems are hardly blameless—no less than Joe Biden did Thomas a big favor by casting doubt on Anita Hill’s claims of sexual harassment—but in the Republican Party, contempt for women is a feature, not a bug. It would do Democrats no good to start hedging their own commitment—new as it is, for some—to gender equity.

Progressives like Kate Harding, who wrote a Washington Post piece last month arguing that Franken’s resignation would do more harm to women than good, believed they were playing the long game when they encouraged Democrats to allow the senator to keep his seat. Kicking him out might make the party look good now, but the potential damage done by the ouster of a good liberal could last for years. I’d counter with an even longer game: Think about the Democrats with long, bright futures ahead of them, the rising stars, the next Obamas, the legislators who might pass universal Medicare or eliminate Medicaid abortion bans or become president someday. If Kirsten Gillibrand, Sherrod Brown, and Kamala Harris didn’t condemn Franken, they’d lose no small degree of faith among women currently feeling empowered by the #MeToo movement to root out abusers. If Franken was allowed to keep his seat while his party comrades twiddled their thumbs, young people who already think the Democratic Party is a corrupt instrument of the bourgeoisie would have one more reason to write it off for good. By sacrificing one senator, however popular he might be and whatever the perils of relinquishing his seat, Democrats were able to prevent irreparable damage to the party’s reputation among the people it should care about most: its base.

There’s another still longer game to think about, too. In the best-case scenario, the hurt caused by Franken’s resignation will be a memorable lesson to Democrats: Don’t mistreat women, or promote the candidacies of people who do—otherwise, your party might take a debilitating loss when it can least afford it, and the whole country will suffer. The moral high ground can be painful to walk, but at least there are fewer gropers there.

There is a split between Democrats/liberals/progressives whether they should hold fast to principle that sexual harassment is bad and men shouldn't get away with it or abandon that principle for the cold political logic that if Al Franken was naughty, it's still not as bad as Roy Moore being nasty.

Winning is better than losing and Dems have been losing a lot. Most of the time because they act like Republicans and abandon and betray their principles as well as the constituents most dependent upon them keeping faith with them.

Al Franken betrayed his principles. There are consequences for that and he's paying them. If you really want Roy Moore and Donald Trump not to get away with their shit, there's a simple fix for that. Elect more Democrats who legislate like Franken but keep their hands to themselves.

MaeZe said:
All the more reason we should not get rid of Franken unless the accusations really do amount to sexual abuse and at the moment, if you look closely at the evidence it is as weak as warm piss.

A photo of a smiling man's dirty mitts on a sleeping woman's tits are pretty compelling evidence to me. And warm piss still smells pretty strong.

MaeZe said:
I am reminded of Karl Rove's Playbook: When you are guilty as accused, no worries, just accuse back. In no time the attention will all be on the opposition defending themselves and they need not be guilty. Guilt doesn't matter, being louder and more assertive in your accusations does.

I'm confused. Are you reading Karl Rove's Playbook or following it in defense of Al Franken? I don't follow Karl Rove's Playbook. Mostly because he's a walking talking turd blossom and I don't find flowers growing out of fecal matter to be all that charming or worthy of serious consideration.

It's easy to assert there's a grand conspiracy afoot to hound Al Franken out of the Senate, but there seems to be a distressing lack of proof of it.

MaeZe said:
Thank all of you who have been willing to look at the evidence.

Evidence? WHAT evidence? Where is it? You got a link to it or something? I must have missed where in this thread you put it.

shakeysix · Dec 8, 2017

The only way to hang on to the ring is to throw it away. Those willing to step away from power, gain power. Those who claw, lie and grapple in the mud for power become...well, we all know the answer to that. --s6

PS--anyone else notice Trump's weird, slurring speech lately? Almost like he is hissing "My Presssshous."

cornflake · Dec 8, 2017

nighttimer said:
Al Franken is the victimizer, not the victim here and it's not a witch hunt when you're behaving like a witch.

I'm not a preacher, so there's no preaching here, but its a spurious argument to make, "I have yet to see the Democratic senators calling for Franken to resign put the same energy into denouncing Moore or Trump." Let's rewind and you can pretty much invalidate every word after "Democratic senators."

Roy Moore and Donald Trump are NOT Democrats. They don't care about being denounced by Democrats, liberals, progressives, or left-handed Lyft drivers. Every Democrat in the country could rise up en masse and denounce those two ass clowns and it would not matter one bit to them or their supporters.

Democrats didn't elect them and Democrats don't matter to them. Moore and Trump got zero fucks to give about denouncements by Democrats. If anything, it would only make those who already love Trump and Moore love them even more. They'd be bigger darlings to the Right than they alread are. Pissing off the Dems? Great! We'll take two scoops of that!

Conservatives will not abandon their heroes because liberals consider them villains. The denouncement by Democrats like Franken didn't make one Republican abandon ship on Donald Trump or Jeff Sessions. What impact do you think the pissing and moaning by 48 Democrats has on 52 Republicans anyway?

The crimes committed by Al Franken against women pale in comparison to those committed by Trump and Moore, but they are all crimes only separated by the seriousness of the transgression. Franken is a pig.

Or maybe he's not.

Trump and Moore are hogs. All three have behaved like swine, but apparently Franken deserves a pass because he's admitted to it and said he's sorry.

He admitted to taking a stupid photo and yes, apologized unreservedly for anything else he'd done, like gripped someone inappropriately during a photo. That's not, in my book, behaving like swine. We're talking about a few women, out of how many thousands, who've said he... gripped them too hard or his hand was on their butt during a publicly-taken photo. Wrong? Yes. Swine? The kissing, I don't know. The last one, the 'it's my right as an entertainer,' one, I flat do not believe, sorry. That sounds utterly ridiculous. Tweedy, I think they didn't like each other and he was happy to fuck with her, which isn't ok, but doesn't make him swine, imo.

What's the message here then? Cop a feel or squeeze a butt and you're good to go, but escalate to sexual assault and rape, and we'll burn ya at the stake? As a man, I'm curious as to what the Rules are here so I don't get 'em confused. Okay, I grabbed her breast, grabbed her butt, but I didn't grab her by the vagina, so I'm cool.

How exactly does this brave new world work?

What numbers wouldn't be meaningless? Eighteen? Eighty? Eight hundred? What's the magic number for you where it does cross the line into sexual predatory behavior?

What's the magic number of women it would take to come forward and say #MeToo includes the surname of Franken right along with Weinstein, Conyers, Allen, Cosby, Simmons, Affleck, Singer, or Moore?

This is different, but its a difference without a distinction. Al Franken preys on women. Roy Moore preys on women too and by this time in a few weeks only one of them will be in the Senate.

I don't know how to make you comfortable with that because I'm not comfortable with it either. It's unfair, but life don't shake out fair for everybody.

Nobody is irreplaceable in politics. Not even Al Franken. Especially, not Al Franken.

There is a split between Democrats/liberals/progressives whether they should hold fast to principle that sexual harassment is bad and men shouldn't get away with it or abandon that principle for the cold political logic that if Al Franken was naughty, it's still not as bad as Roy Moore being nasty.

Winning is better than losing and Dems have been losing a lot. Most of the time because they act like Republicans and abandon and betray their principles as well as the constituents most dependent upon them keeping faith with them.

Al Franken betrayed his principles. There are consequences for that and he's paying them. If you really want Roy Moore and Donald Trump not to get away with their shit, there's a simple fix for that. Elect more Democrats who legislate like Franken but keep their hands to themselves.

A photo of a smiling man's dirty mitts on a sleeping woman's tits are pretty compelling evidence to me. And warm piss still smells pretty strong.

I'm confused. Are you reading Karl Rove's Playbook or following it in defense of Al Franken? I don't follow Karl Rove's Playbook. Mostly because he's a walking talking turd blossom and I don't find flowers growing out of fecal matter to be all that charming or worthy of serious consideration.

It's easy to assert there's a grand conspiracy afoot to hound Al Franken out of the Senate, but there seems to be a distressing lack of proof of it.

Evidence? WHAT evidence? Where is it? You got a link to it or something? I must have missed where in this thread you put it.

His hands are not on her tits, or her flack jacket, or her, at all. Even in a juvenile, stupid photo, he was mindful to not actually put his hands on her.

Woollybear · Dec 8, 2017

I don't know what I think about Franken and the accusations but I can tell you I'll be watching him more closely to see what he says and does.

I would say that anyone says democrats should behave like republicans 'because that works' has a short memory.

"I did not have sex with that woman" was a ridiculous thing to say, and sounds like something Moore would say. (It was B. Clinton.)

In my opinion, Hilary Clinton took a taint from that, whether it's fair or not. She has many strengths, and more than one or two taints. I have to wonder if Bill had been more of an honest man in the '90s,, if she would have won the electoral college in 2016. (she should have won in a landslide).

I don't think Democrats should fight like Republicans. The world is going to hell one way or another, so maybe it's best to hold onto ideals.

Spoiler:
No one gets out of this thing alive.

AW Admin · Dec 8, 2017

cornflake said:
His hands are not on her tits, or her flack jacket, or her, at all. Even in a juvenile, stupid photo, he was mindful to not actually put his hands on her.

The photo was the thing that got me. And I can't see well enough (and have 0 depth perception) and wouldn't have known he wasn't touching her. Thank you for saying that.

Roxxsmom · Dec 8, 2017

cornflake said:
He admitted to taking a stupid photo and yes, apologized unreservedly for anything else he'd done, like gripped someone inappropriately during a photo. That's not, in my book, behaving like swine. We're talking about a few women, out of how many thousands, who've said he... gripped them too hard or his hand was on their butt during a publicly-taken photo. Wrong? Yes. Swine? The kissing, I don't know. The last one, the 'it's my right as an entertainer,' one, I flat do not believe, sorry. That sounds utterly ridiculous. Tweedy, I think they didn't like each other and he was happy to fuck with her, which isn't ok, but doesn't make him swine, imo.

I think we have to be careful going down this path.

Men accused of sexual abuse can always say that someone else was worse, or that it was inadvertent (even rapists often say they thought the woman was okay with it or blame their own drunkedness) or that it was only a few cases of the countless thousands of women they interacted with.

Are the victims credible, or are they over sensitive, or are they nefariously embellishing or exaggerating things in order to bring down a popular Democrat?

I can understand the temptation to think the latter might be the case. After all, conservatives are good at impaling liberals on their own sword, whether it be free speech, allegations of marginalization, or believing allegations about sexual assaults. When you have a code of ethics that relies on a sense of fairness, transparency and equality, it's easy to twist that around into a sick parody of itself that leaves liberals gasping like landed fish.

But if Democrats insist that these particular women are mostly lying or mistaken about what happened, Republicans can say the same thing about the allegations against their own. Heck, they already are.

We all know that a small percentage of women (no more, my most accounts, than people who lie about other crimes) do lie about sexual misconduct, and we also know there is more motivation to lie in cases like this. It's often hard to prove what really happened, unless it's captured in a video or picture. Even then, context might be missing. It's that seed of doubt that has always been used as justification for letting men accused of sexual harassment and assault off the hook.

When should we believe the accused instead of the accusers? What standard of evidence should be required before a resignation is requested or charges are pressed. The status quo has been about believing the men in these cases and about silencing the women. Has the pendulum swung too far in the other direction now? Should women who feel they've been victimized not come forward if they lack ironclad proof? Should the position of the man in question and his past history as an ally to women's issues be a factor here.

lizmonster · Dec 8, 2017

Patty said:
I don't think Democrats should fight like Republicans. The world is going to hell one way or another, so maybe it's best to hold onto ideals.

I don't think that's the choice here. I think the problem is that Democrats don't understand how Republicans are fighting, and as such have no idea how to defend themselves.

And I'm not going to excuse Franken anything. I am not objective in any fashion, and I'm not going to tell anyone how to process either the accusations or his admissions. But as someone whose #metoo is much closer to that of Moore's victims than Franken's, I find the idea that they're equally horrid to be...counterintuitive. They can both be wrong (and even both deserve to be drummed out of politics) without being held up as equivalent.

That this is a sea change for the Democratic party is evident, and I'm glad to see that people are finally recognizing the damage that sexual harassment, assault, and abuse are doing. That the Democrats' epiphany won't affect the Republicans one bit also seems evident, although I'm eager to be proved wrong.

Patty said:
In my opinion, Hilary Clinton took a taint from that, whether it's fair or not. She has many strengths, and more than one or two taints. I have to wonder if Bill had been more of an honest man, if she would have won the electoral college.

There have been a lot of armchair analyses of the election, but it seems pretty clear to me that if Hilary Clinton had been Bill, she would have won the electoral college. Everybody likes to paint the election as white economic fear, but the sexism factor was huge, even in the primaries. Even now.

cornflake · Dec 8, 2017

AW Admin said:
The photo was the thing that got me. And I can't see well enough (and have 0 depth perception) and wouldn't have known he wasn't touching her. Thank you for saying that.

I'm glad, and it's not, btw, equivocal. He is not touching her. He's mugging like 'look, boobs!/look at me about to grab her chest' with the exaggerated face and wide hands (like a 14-yr-old would do to a sleeping classmate on the bus because juvenile asshole behaviour), but is visibly away, in the pic, from her jacket. I don't mean I think he actually did grab her later, I just mean that's the point of the pic, the mugging for the camera as if he was going to grab her. The way he was doing it, she'd have woken up, had he done it. It's exaggerated.

Roxxsmom said:
I think we have to be careful going down this path.

Men accused of sexual abuse can always say that someone else was worse, or that it was inadvertent (even rapists often say they thought the woman was okay with it or blame their own drunkedness) or that it was only a few cases of the countless thousands of women they interacted with.

Are the victims credible, or are they over sensitive, or are they nefariously embellishing or exaggerating things in order to bring down a popular Democrat?

I can understand the temptation to think the latter might be the case. After all, conservatives are good at impaling liberals on their own sword, whether it be free speech, allegations of marginalization, or believing allegations about sexual assaults. When you have a code of ethics that relies on a sense of fairness, transparency and equality, it's easy to twist that around into a sick parody of itself that leaves liberals gasping like landed fish.

But if Democrats insist that these particular women are mostly lying or mistaken about what happened, Republicans can say the same thing about the allegations against their own. Heck, they already are.

We all know that a small percentage of women (no more, my most accounts, than people who lie about other crimes) do lie about sexual misconduct, and we also know there is more motivation to lie in cases like this. It's often hard to prove what really happened, unless it's captured in a video or picture. Even then, context might be missing. It's that seed of doubt that has always been used as justification for letting men accused of sexual harassment and assault off the hook.

When should we believe the accused instead of the accusers? What standard of evidence should be required before a resignation is requested or charges are pressed. The status quo has been about believing the men in these cases and about silencing the women. Has the pendulum swung too far in the other direction now? Should women who feel they've been victimized not come forward if they lack ironclad proof? Should the position of the man in question and his past history as an ally to women's issues be a factor here.

Believe me, it bothers me to go there, both because I don't want to be that person picking and choosing which victims to believe, or someone who is not believing accusers of the person I like, or not believing people because they're Trump-supporting birthers. I'm trying, hard, to be very aware of all of that stuff and be mindful of how I'm viewing things and what's fair and what's biased and what I want to say and think and what I should and shouldn't do regardless and etc.

I still think the 'my right as an entertainer,' thing is just... bullshit, I'm sorry. No one talks like that. It sounds like an ape of the Trump video; it sounds like no one; it doesn't sound like Franken.

I am not dismissing Tweedy all together, though I really want to. That he's not touching her in the photo is just a fact.

As I said, the other kissing things, I dunno. The squeezing in pics... I'm not discounting that this happened. I'm just saying I don't think it makes him swine.

Even the accusers saying it aren't even saying he had some ritual to get to grab their asses, a la HW Bush, and there, yes, I'm aware I may be using a comparative thing and sigh. Yet still. I dunno. I know what you're saying, I do. I don't want to be dismissive of people I disagree with or who accuse those I like. I am trying to avoid that.

Alessandra Kelley · Dec 8, 2017

Jane Curtin said years ago that the Saturday Night Live work environment during the 1970s and 1980s was sexist and misogynist (not that her story got much play).

Franken’s revealed behavior is not hugely surprising.

One can only hope that the lesson - this time, perhaps, at last - will not be “Women sure whine a lot” but instead “Men should not act like grabby arses.”

ElaineA · Dec 8, 2017

nighttimer said:
What's the message here then? Cop a feel or squeeze a butt and you're good to go, but escalate to sexual assault and rape, and we'll burn ya at the stake? As a man, I'm curious as to what the Rules are here so I don't get 'em confused. Okay, I grabbed her breast, grabbed her butt, but I didn't grab her by the vagina, so I'm cool.
How exactly does this brave new world work?

This is an extremely legit question, and one that's probably not to be worked out here, but I'm going to take it up insofar as it relates to the other bits of this post I pulled out. I think the key is to internalize that there is no one-size-fits-all manner of behaving with other people--we all (men and women) have different tolerances--and so the safest course is to use the most conservative judgement. It's only okay once you've been given permission. Everything else is off limits. Sorry, I know it's hard. I'm a natural hugger and casual-touch person. It's hard for me, too, and I fail. A lot.

nighttimer said:
What numbers wouldn't be meaningless? Eighteen? Eighty? Eight hundred? What's the magic number for you where it does cross the line into sexual predatory behavior?

IMO there is a distinction between careless and predatory behavior. Franken was careless, in the true sense of the word. He didn't care about whether people he was interacting with wanted to be touched. He wanted to touch, or felt okay to, so he did. That's subtly different from predatory. Predatory is what Moore did, what Lauer, Weinstein, O'Reilly, Halperin & Weiner did. Go after women (or men, in some of these other cases) with intent to gain something, and with malice aforethought. I'm not trying to exonerate Franken, and I'm not saying careless touching is more okay than predatory touching, but from a morals standpoint, one seems to be more redeemable (eventually) than the other, assuming a change in behavior patterns.

nighttimer said:
Winning is better than losing and Dems have been losing a lot. Most of the time because they act like Republicans and abandon and betray their principles as well as the constituents most dependent upon them keeping faith with them.

Al Franken betrayed his principles.

The Al Franken we see now is a different man from comedian Al Franken, and I might argue he grew principles. The most recent accusation was from 2010, and that's recent enough to make my argument questionable, but most of the accusations are from farther back, and most are related to his behavior while a comedian, not a senator. The "betrayal" happened before he grew into the principles, it seems. Maybe.

I won't defend him. He behaved like a boor, and he's paying for it. And there are others who don't behave like boors who deserve a chance at leadership. But unlike, the others I mentioned above, who I doubt could ever prove to my satisfaction they had changed for the better, I feel more of a willingness to perhaps look at Franken again, once he's had a time out, and assuming no more scurrilous reports surface. Lauer and his ilk can go straight to hell.

Woollybear · Dec 8, 2017

lizmonster said:
I don't think that's the choice here. I think the problem is that Democrats don't understand how Republicans are fighting, and as such have no idea how to defend themselves.

It's always seemed to me that Republicans fight through the use of fear, and tie that to an implication that they are strong. Democrats try to avoid motivation through fear. That's how it looks to me.

As far as #metoo, my experiences were less egregious than the accusations #metoo is about. I can't say #metoo. --- instead I have been professionally harassed and demeaned, and subjected to age discrimination as well. These aren't the issue in this thread. At the moment professional harassment is not particularly illegal. A lot of people work for A*holes.

My husband mentions a babysitter that did some very inappropriate things when he was a child. It's a mess, and that is not meant to excuse any of it. Many SNL players have defended Franken, and I have no idea.

Prozyan · Dec 8, 2017

ElaineA said:
The Al Franken we see now is a different man from comedian Al Franken, and I might argue he grew principles. The most recent accusation was from 2010, and that's recent enough to make my argument questionable, but most of the accusations are from farther back, and most are related to his behavior while a comedian, not a senator. The "betrayal" happened before he grew into the principles, it seems. Maybe.

This argument is specious. As far as I know, Moore's most recent accusation was from 1991. Why couldn't he have grown "principles"? Because he hasn't apologized? Neither did Franken. The closest he came was a generic "I'm sorry you felt violated". In fact, Franken has never apologized for ANY past misogynistic behavior, included pitching a comedic script about raping a woman, continuously hiding behind the I-am-a-comedian-it-is-my-job schtick.

I understand your sentiment that you feel one is more redeemed than the other, but I think that is a product of bias more than anything. You seem to "like" Franken more and are thus more likely to forgive.

NT has the right of it. They are both pork. Perhaps different cuts, but at the end of the day, still swine.

MaeZe · Dec 8, 2017

AW Admin said:
The photo was the thing that got me. And I can't see well enough (and have 0 depth perception) and wouldn't have known he wasn't touching her. Thank you for saying that.

And consider something else which I am borrowing from another forum:

The photo was an inexcusable lapse of judgement.

Click to expand...

For a politician? Yes.

For a comedian? No.

That is one of the problems with mid-life career changes.

JJ Litke · Dec 8, 2017

nighttimer said:
I'm not a preacher, so there's no preaching here, but its a spurious argument to make, "I have yet to see the Democratic senators calling for Franken to resign put the same energy into denouncing Moore or Trump." Let's rewind and you can pretty much invalidate every word after "Democratic senators."

No, because my post was in response to the concept of the Democrats taking the so-called moral high ground.

nighttimer said:
Roy Moore and Donald Trump are NOT Democrats. They don't care about being denounced by Democrats, liberals, progressives, or left-handed Lyft drivers. Every Democrat in the country could rise up en masse and denounce those two ass clowns and it would not matter one bit to them or their supporters.

So Democrats in the senate should not take a stand? They shouldn't do anything, just throw up their hands and be like, well they won't listen to us so we'll just not speak up.

They are senators, and Moore is about to join their ranks. There has been no collective stand about Moore by them, in spite of the fact that his actions are far worse.

You don't get to claim you're taking the moral high ground if you only do it when it's easy.

cornflake · Dec 8, 2017

Alessandra Kelley said:
Jane Curtin said years ago that the Saturday Night Live work environment during the 1970s and 1980s was sexist and misogynist (not that her story got much play).

Franken’s revealed behavior is not hugely surprising.

One can only hope that the lesson - this time, perhaps, at last - will not be “Women sure whine a lot” but instead “Men should not act like grabby arses.”

Yet 36 women who worked with him on SNL signed an open letter of support saying he treated them with respect and did not engage in that kind of behaviour, which, as a couple of us mentioned, should not be notable but is kind of a deal for years at SNL.

Prozyan said:
This argument is specious. As far as I know, Moore's most recent accusation was from 1991. Why couldn't he have grown "principles"? Because he hasn't apologized? Neither did Franken. The closest he came was a generic "I'm sorry you felt violated". In fact, Franken has never apologized for ANY past misogynistic behavior, included pitching a comedic script about raping a woman, continuously hiding behind the I-am-a-comedian-it-is-my-job schtick.

I understand your sentiment that you feel one is more redeemed than the other, but I think that is a product of bias more than anything. You seem to "like" Franken more and are thus more likely to forgive.

NT has the right of it. They are both pork. Perhaps cuts, but at the end of the day, still swine.

Moore could have grown principles.

First, if he had, that would not discount years of preying on young teens when he was a grown-ass man, which is wholly different from squeezing someone while taking a photo with them.

Second, if he had, one might presume he'd, at the least, acknowledge he'd done anything wrong -- as far as I know, he has not.

Finally, if he had, I'd think that'd lead to some discussion on his part of not just what he did wrong, but how he's changed. As far as I know the only thing he's said that's acknowledged anything has been an oblique comment that everyone he dated he had their mother's permission, which kind of doesn't help anything.

Tazlima · Dec 8, 2017

JJ Litke said:
So Democrats in the senate should not take a stand? They shouldn't do anything, just throw up their hands and be like, well they won't listen to us so we'll just not speak up.

They are senators, and Moore is about to join their ranks. There has been no collective stand about Moore by them, in spite of the fact that his actions are far worse.

You don't get to claim you're taking the moral high ground if you only do it when it's easy.

I figure Franken's leaving was merely step 1 in taking the moral high ground. If they hadn't taken this step, any demands that Moore be shown the door (assuming he wins) would have been answered with, "eh, your guy is bad, too, and you kept him, so obviously you don't REALLY care about this stuff. You just want a political advantage." This gives the Democrats the ability to say, "We got rid of ours. Now it's your turn. Let's see your true colors. Is there any part of you, deep down, that actually believes the morals you pretend to represent?" ...It doesn't matter if Franken is guilty or as pure as the driven snow, for this to work, he had to go.

Either the Republicans agree and maybe, just maybe, this downward spiral into awfulness can start to be reversed (that would be lovely, although I don't think it will happen), or they don't and look like the world's biggest creeps in front of every voter in the US. Their base may stick with them, but there are plenty of independents watching with great interest to see how this plays out (I'm one of them).

Just wait, if Moore wins, a concerted effort to give him the boot will be next.

cornflake · Dec 8, 2017

Tazlima said:
I figure Franken's leaving was merely step 1 in taking the moral high ground. If they hadn't taken this step, any demands that Moore be shown the door (assuming he wins) would have been answered with, "eh, your guy is bad, too, and you kept him, so obviously you don't REALLY care about this stuff. You just want a political advantage." This gives the Democrats the ability to say, "We got rid of ours. Now it's your turn. Let's see your true colors. Is there any part of you, deep down, that actually believes the morals you pretend to represent?" ...It doesn't matter if Franken is guilty or as pure as the driven snow, for this to work, he had to go.

Either the Republicans agree and maybe, just maybe, this downward spiral into awfulness can start to be reversed (that would be lovely), or they don't and look like the world's biggest creeps in front of every voter in the US.

Just wait, if Moore wins, a concerted effort to give him the boot will be next.

Any democrat in the senate who thinks the reps are going to dump Moore is smoking something serious, imo. They've already said: a. the women are lying, b. it was a long time ago so it's immaterial, c. they need the votes so it's immaterial.

lizmonster · Dec 8, 2017

Tazlima said:
Just wait, if Moore wins, a concerted effort to give him the boot will be next.

As long as he votes the way they want, they'll say his accusers are making it up and ignore it the same way they have for POTUS. They literally do not care if he's a child molester or not.

This kind of thing doesn't help.

I've lived through too many cycles of backlash to think this one will end any differently.

Please, Society. Prove me wrong this time.

Tazlima · Dec 8, 2017

cornflake said:
Any democrat in the senate who thinks the reps are going to dump Moore is smoking something serious, imo. They've already said: a. the women are lying, b. it was a long time ago so it's immaterial, c. they need the votes so it's immaterial.

Yeah, I know. That's my little pipe dream. But it'll shine a spotlight on the fact that they're power-hungry *expletive deleted,* who genuinely don't give two shits about women, and removes the excuse of "well, THEY do it tooooo."

And yes, dumping Moore would lose them a vote, but the Democrats have also voluntarily lost a vote already (two, actually), so it's "fair," yanno?

It reminds me of a gang war where people keep killing each other in vengence for people previously killed in vengence of previous vengence killings, etc. It will continue indefinitely until one side decides to actually put down their weapons.

Alessandra Kelley · Dec 8, 2017

cornflake said:
Yet 36 women who worked with him on SNL signed an open letter of support saying he treated them with respect and did not engage in that kind of behaviour, which, as a couple of us mentioned, should not be notable but is kind of a deal for years at SNL.

And Clarence Thomas produced a lineup of office ladies who vowed that he had never hit on them.

No number of people swearing they did not see something disproves evidence, witnesses, and photographs demonstrating that something did happen.

People who behave supportively and respectfully can also commit predatory acts. One does not negate the other.

Tazlima · Dec 8, 2017

Alessandra Kelley said:
And Clarence Thomas produced a lineup of office ladies who vowed that he had never hit on them.

No number of people swearing they did not see something disproves evidence, witnesses, and photographs demonstrating that something did happen.

People who behave supportively and respectfully can also commit predatory acts. One does not negate the other.

This.

As an extreme example, can you imagine the friends and family of a murderer signing a letter pointing out, "well... he never murdered ME?"

Twick · Dec 8, 2017

I've noticed a few comments on movies from the 70s and 80s, even by male commenters going "Gosh, that scene in a beloved classic now looks a little ... uncomfortable. Sexually assaultive or coercive, even. Why didn't we see that before?" The thing is that no one did. These things that make us squirm in discomfort now made audiences giggle appreciately, or sigh over how romantic they were.

I have a little sympathy for at least some of the men being accused of improper behaviour in those days because Harvey Weinstein did have a point (although no excuse) - the zeitgeist of that time found this stuff funny. Groping women just showed what a stud you are. Women who complained were puritans suffering outdated inhibitions. Goodness, even staid Ann Landers could write approvingly of recently-deceased Bertrand Russell that "he remained a pincher to the end." What a guy, right? Not all air-fairy thinky stuff for him when a nubile young woman was within arm's reach!

So I think there are a lot of men out there that may have known that yes, the pinches and the leers and the grabs passed off as jokes bothered women. But they didn't see it as important. It was the way humour worked. Women's annoyance or outrage or tears was part of the pattern of the joke, like saying "who's there?" after someone said "knock, knock." (Look how many comedians still brag about not being "politically correct" when there is no longer a monolithic political correctness.) They saw other people laughing, and believed that they weren't actually doing any harm.

It is, I think, coming as a shock to many entertainers of a certain age that the women weren't in on the joke. That they were, instead, simmering with rage, and that rage would one day explode. That one day, no one would accept "but it was funny when I goosed her in front of the other cast members!" as an excuse.

ElaineA · Dec 8, 2017

Prozyan said:
This argument is specious. As far as I know, Moore's most recent accusation was from 1991. Why couldn't he have grown "principles"? Because he hasn't apologized? Neither did Franken. The closest he came was a generic "I'm sorry you felt violated". In fact, Franken has never apologized for ANY past misogynistic behavior, included pitching a comedic script about raping a woman, continuously hiding behind the I-am-a-comedian-it-is-my-job schtick.

I understand your sentiment that you feel one is more redeemed than the other, but I think that is a product of bias more than anything. You seem to "like" Franken more and are thus more likely to forgive.

NT has the right of it. They are both pork. Perhaps cuts, but at the end of the day, still swine.

I did say it was specious, but I'll just reply that I don't think one is more "redeemed" than the other, but more redeemable. Perhaps it's bias, but it isn't political bias, if that's what you're getting at (since you only bring up Moore). Most of the other names I mentioned were known democrats or democratic supporters. I do see a difference between a butt squeeze and giving a co-worker a sex toy or sending a dick pic, although I don't believe the butt squeeze deserves exoneration while the dick-pic doesn't. I'm not defending Franken.

As for why Moore can't grow principles? He shows a general and long-standing disdain for people who don't think like him. His "principles" are well established, hardened, and unflinching. Sorry, I don't hold out hope for him.

Woollybear · Dec 8, 2017

Yep. To Twick. That was the age when a word like 'frigid' was used to describe a woman who didn't want to have sex with you, and 'colder than a witch's tit' was a way to describe the weather. (these words should be left in their graves.)

There were three male teachers in my high school (600 students, early 80s) known to flirt with and want to date girls. If i remember correctly, one was assistant principle.

We knew it. It was gross but part of the culture. And I bet Roy Moore in the 70s had no idea what he was doing was so wrong. Some of the girls didn't know. When I was 17 the idea of dating a 19 year old was dreamy. i didn't know what 'jail bait' meant but it was weird to me that 15/17 was OK for dating, and 17/19 wasn't.

None of this excuses anything. A 34 yo man should never try to date a teenager. And groping butts is stupid and can leave a woman with scars, too.

JJ Litke · Dec 8, 2017

Patty said:
And I bet Roy Moore in the 70s had no idea what he was doing was so wrong.

The Gadsden Mall knew it was wrong.

Come on, a 32yo man dating 14yos was not an accepted part of 70s culture. That's just flat out wrong to try to claim it was.

Al Franken Is Toast

No Gods No Masters

blue eyed floozy

practical experience, FTW

Beastly Fido

Possibly A Mermaid Queen

practical experience, FTW

Sophipygian

All about that action, boss.

Are you one, Herbert?

People are not wearing enough hats

practical experience, FTW

practical experience, FTW

Possibly A Mermaid Queen

Sophipygian

All about that action, boss.

People are not wearing enough hats